Jim Kelly remains optimistic about the Bills staying in Buffalo

[ckg927]

Just aired on Channel 2's 6pm news and posted to its website.

Though, obviously, Kelly didn't really say all that much-for obvious reasons-there is some hope for keeping the Bills in WNY.

http://www.wgrz.com/sports/article/192349/4/Kelly-The-Bills-are-not-going-anywhere

[Skooby]

We tried everything will be the final call by Jim.

[ServoBillieves]

Not going to happen, plain and simple.

[Ed]

I'm trying to think of a polite way to say that if Ralph won't sell the team then I'm ready for him to leave this earth...

[ServoBillieves]

I'm trying to think of a polite way to say that if Ralph won't sell the team then I'm ready for him to leave this earth...

He wants the best for his already rich family, he doesn't care about the fan base. He won't sell the team, and when he dies it will become a bidding war. Guess how many people in Buffalo have enough money to outbid LA or Toronto? Yeah... no.

[SpikedLemonade]

I'm trying to think of a polite way to say that if Ralph won't sell the team then I'm ready for him to leave this earth...

No need for politeness these days.

[Ed]

He wants the best for his already rich family, he doesn't care about the fan base. He won't sell the team, and when he dies it will become a bidding war. Guess how many people in Buffalo have enough money to outbid LA or Toronto? Yeah... no.
I honestly believe at this point that Ralph just wants to see his team win a superbowl and he's not going to give up until he dies, whether he's competent enough to make that happen or not. He's already given his family the best and he's even starting to outlive them. The Bills have been his life. I can't blame him for not wanting to give them up.

[SquishDaFish]

He wants the best for his already rich family, he doesn't care about the fan base. He won't sell the team, and when he dies it will become a bidding war. Guess how many people in Buffalo have enough money to outbid LA or Toronto? Yeah... no.

I want the team to have a different owner too BUT the reason he wont sell is because of the Estate Tax. Its lower if its sold after his death.

[coastal]

How many times has Jill helped her drunk husband to bed?

[gonzo1105]

Why do I get this weird feeling that Ralph is giving the team to Jim in his will. Maybe thats just hope but him saying he knows of things makes me think their is a succession plan. You can also see Jim is always around. I think these investors are people who will buy a minority stake in the team to pay off the taxes and share in ownership as part of the deal. Just a guess but he seems supremely confident about it

- - - Updated - - -

Why do I get this weird feeling that Ralph is giving the team to Jim in his will. Maybe thats just hope but him saying he knows of things makes me think their is a succession plan. You can also see Jim is always around. I think these investors are people who will buy a minority stake in the team to pay off the taxes and share in ownership as part of the deal. Just a guess but he seems supremely confident about it

[YardRat]

Why do I get this weird feeling that Ralph is giving the team to Jim in his will.

Obviously Ralph is fond of Jimbo, but he isn't that smitten with him.

[Skooby]

How many times has Jill helped her drunk husband to bed?

How many times did another woman helped Jill's husband to bed is a better question, he apologized quite a bit for his previous deceptions.

[BertSquirtgum]

Not going to happen, plain and simple.

What's not going to happen?

[Skooby]

What's not going to happen?

Bills staying in Buffalo, you read my rant about what's set up right?

[OpIv37]

I love Kelly, I really do. He's my 2nd favorite player all-time, behind Bruce Smith. I even met him and played touch football with him at Jim Kelly Football Camp in Rochester back in the day. He had an ego, but he really cared about that camp. A lot of athletes lend their name to something, make a token appearance and disappear. He missed the first day because of a prior commitment, but he was there all day, every day after that, in the hot summer sun (ok, it was Rochester so it wasn't that hot), driving around in a golf cart helping all the different groups (we were divided by age and then by position).

So, I hate to say anything bad about the guy. And I like what he's saying and TRYING to do about the Bills.

But the reality is that it is completely out of his power. He doesn't have the money or the political clout to do much about the team's future. He's well-respected and he's a great cheerleader for keeping the team in Buffalo, but that's it. As with every previous time this subject has come up, he says nothing concrete. He alludes to people and interests and behind-the-scenes long-term plans, but there are no details, no evidence, nothing real.

Yes, I know "the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" (in Sam Jackson Boondocks voice), but please tell me this: if Ralph has a plan for the team after his death, what benefit is there to keeping it on the down low? He's getting raked through the coals by the fans and the media, and a concrete plan to keep the team in Buffalo would allow him to live out his life as a hero regardless of how crappy the team does on the field. Keeping it silent adds no benefit whatsoever.

[SpikedLemonade]

I love Kelly, I really do. He's my 2nd favorite player all-time, behind Bruce Smith. I even met him and played touch football with him at Jim Kelly Football Camp in Rochester back in the day. He had an ego, but he really cared about that camp. A lot of athletes lend their name to something, make a token appearance and disappear. He missed the first day because of a prior commitment, but he was there all day, every day after that, in the hot summer sun (ok, it was Rochester so it wasn't that hot), driving around in a golf cart helping all the different groups (we were divided by age and then by position).

So, I hate to say anything bad about the guy. And I like what he's saying and TRYING to do about the Bills.

But the reality is that it is completely out of his power. He doesn't have the money or the political clout to do much about the team's future. He's well-respected and he's a great cheerleader for keeping the team in Buffalo, but that's it. As with every previous time this subject has come up, he says nothing concrete. He alludes to people and interests and behind-the-scenes long-term plans, but there are no details, no evidence, nothing real.

Yes, I know "the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" (in Sam Jackson Boondocks voice), but please tell me this: if Ralph has a plan for the team after his death, what benefit is there to keeping it on the down low? He's getting raked through the coals by the fans and the media, and a concrete plan to keep the team in Buffalo would allow him to live out his life as a hero regardless of how crappy the team does on the field. Keeping it silent adds no benefit whatsoever.

Exactly right.

[BertSquirtgum]

I've always said the Bills aren't moving. All the doubters can go fist themselves.

[OpIv37]

I've always said the Bills aren't moving. All the doubters can go fist themselves.

Doubters? you mean realists?

Evidence for Bills moving:
1. No stadium lease, aging stadium in need of repair in a broke state/municipality that seemingly have no interest in paying for replacement/renovation
2. Owner dying with a family that has publicly stated they have no interest in running the team and probably couldn't afford the taxes on it if they did want to.
3. New stadium in LA looking for an owner
4. NFL owners that stand to gain by removing a recipient from the revenue sharing and adding a contributor

Evidence for Bills staying:
1. Toronto deal
2. Jim Kelly said so.

[Skooby]

I've always said the Bills aren't moving. All the doubters can go fist themselves.

Well this settles it, the Bills are staying.



Doubters? you mean realists?


Evidence for Bills moving:
1. No stadium lease, aging stadium in need of repair in a broke state/municipality that seemingly have no interest in paying for replacement/renovation
2. Owner dying with a family that has publicly stated they have no interest in running the team and probably couldn't afford the taxes on it if they did want to.
3. New stadium in LA looking for an owner
4. NFL owners that stand to gain by removing a recipient from the revenue sharing and adding a contributor

5.) Owner with no family desire to continue in town. Check.


6.) Coach that an elderly retread that made us below average. Check.


7.) Marketing department with a captive audience but without anything to sell. Check.


8.) Stadium that's crippled by age & any reasonable amenities equal to a row house ready for tomato pickers in South Florida. Check.


9.) Town that lost it's luster 30 + years ago & expanded most social services / bus routes into most major suburbs. Check.


10.) Socialist state of politics that pays most of it's money for previous corruptions allowed by the entitlement systems. Check.

Evidence for Bills staying:
1. Toronto deal
2. Jim Kelly said so.

Just helping you out here:

http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/showthread.php/215813-Buffalo-Bills-are-set-to-close-shop-in-Buffalo

[BLeonard]

Yes, I know "the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" (in Sam Jackson Boondocks voice), but please tell me this: if Ralph has a plan for the team after his death, what benefit is there to keeping it on the down low? He's getting raked through the coals by the fans and the media, and a concrete plan to keep the team in Buffalo would allow him to live out his life as a hero regardless of how crappy the team does on the field. Keeping it silent adds no benefit whatsoever.

I've thought about this a lot myself and I might actually have an answer for you:

Ralph Wilson has always had the "I'll move the team" card in his back pocket and he hasn't been afraid to pull it out. Hell, he originally wanted to have his team in Miami, but they told him to piss off. In the early 70's, he threatened to move the team unless he got a new stadium. It was also brought up in the late 90's, when Erie County gave him a sweetheart lease agreement, which basically allows the Bills to play at RWS rent-free.

Now, at age 94, the "I'll move the team" card is mentioned more by fans than by Ralph himself. Ask yourself this: How many times have you heard or read a fan say that "If we don't buy tickets, Ralph will move the team"? Other popular phrases include things like "I'd rather have the Bills stay and never win than have them move," among other similar phrases.

THAT is where Ralph's advantage of not saying anything about a succession plan kicks in.

Think about this: What if Ralph came out tomorrow and said "I have a succession plan, here it is, the Bills will be in Buffalo forever!" Now, initally, as you said, people would consider him a hero. The problem for Ralph lies after that initial wave af enthusiasm.

After people get all calmed down about the team not moving, they would EXPECT RESULTS ON THE FOOTBALL FIELD. All of those people that only bought tickets and merchandise out of fear of moving the team? That fear is gone, now. Results on the football field have ALWAYS been Ralph's weak point. Without that trump card of moving, the Bills would then be treated like any other NFL team as far as ticket and merchandise sales are concerned... In other words, no winning team, no ticket sales.

So, in short, at this stage of his life, we all know (or should know) that Ralph won't be moving the Bills in his lifetime. But, the fear of the unknown after his death is the exact reason that so many people are willing to support the team in the form of ticket and merchandise sales, even though they haven't made the playoffs in the 21st century. My guess would be, the fear of the team leaving after Wilson's death is the main reason that some people think that continuing to buy tickets now will ensure the Bills' future in Buffalo after Wilson is gone.

Think about it from Wilson's perspective: It makes perfect sense to say nothing and keep the people guessing... Especially if tickets and merchandise are still selling with minimal effort on his end.

-Bill

[ckg927]

That new stadium in downtown LA will likely get the Chargers...IF it ever gets built. That place isn't even expected to open until 2016-and that's if they can reach a deal with the NFL AND entice a team to move to L.A. As I said, San Diego is likely to move up I-5 to L.A.

[OpIv37]

That's a bit of a conspiracy theory, but it's not entirely outside the realm of possibility.

I honestly don't think the team will move as long as Ralph is alive. If he was going to do it, he would have done it and cashed in years ago.

After he dies, though, anything can happen.

[Skooby]

Why would a guy with a business in town for 50 years need to answer to anyone?

[YardRat]

There is absolutely nothing to gain for Ralph by revealing any succession plan, if in fact there is one in place.

I can understand both points of view, and neither is more or less valid than the other, but the thing that intrigues me is for years Kelly had been pretty vocal about the ownership/staying in Buffalo issue and suddenly about two seasons ago he basically clammed up. Where his previous comments always struck me as having a touch of anxiety laced within the words, anytime the subject comes up in more recent discussions he seems to exude a quiet (albeit secretive) confidence.

Nothing remotely resembling evidence of the team staying, by any stretch of the imagination, but IMO his demeanor speaks louder than his words.

[BertSquirtgum]

Doubters? you mean realists?


No, I meant doubters.

- - - Updated - - -


Well this settles it, the Bills are staying.




Just helping you out here:

http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/showthread.php/215813-Buffalo-Bills-are-set-to-close-shop-in-Buffalo

Nobody wants to look at your dumb ass thread skooby.

[OpIv37]

There is absolutely nothing to gain for Ralph by revealing any succession plan, if in fact there is one in place.



Yes there is: reputation for the remaining years of his life, plus the support from an appreciative city. Conversely, there is absolutely nothing to gain by keeping it secret.

[BLeonard]

Yes there is: reputation for the remaining years of his life, plus the support from an appreciative city. Conversely, there is absolutely nothing to gain by keeping it secret.

I'd have to disagree, based on my previous post...

Besides, which do you think Ralph cares more about at this stage... His reputation or more money for his heirs...?

-Bill

[better days]

Doubters? you mean realists?

Evidence for Bills moving:
1. No stadium lease, aging stadium in need of repair in a broke state/municipality that seemingly have no interest in paying for replacement/renovation
2. Owner dying with a family that has publicly stated they have no interest in running the team and probably couldn't afford the taxes on it if they did want to.
3. New stadium in LA looking for an owner
4. NFL owners that stand to gain by removing a recipient from the revenue sharing and adding a contributor

Evidence for Bills staying:
1. Toronto deal
2. Jim Kelly said so.

Evidence for Bills moving:
1. Bills & Erie County are in negotiations.
2. Ralph is old, but not dying. Other than his hip he is reported to be in good health & could live another 10 years or even more.
3. TALK of a stadium in LA. There is NO Stadium & we will probably all be dead before there is.
4. LA is worth more to the owners with no team than it would be with a team.

[OpIv37]

Evidence for Bills moving:
1. Bills & Erie County are in negotiations.
2. Ralph is old, but not dying. Other than his hip he is reported to be in good health & could live another 10 years or even more.
3. TALK of a stadium in LA. There is NO Stadium & we will probably all be dead before there is.
4. LA is worth more to the owners with no team than it would be with a team.
1. Bills & Erie county have been in negotiations for a long time. They aren't going well.
2. Ralph is dying. This is the first year he hasn't been able to make games, and he was hospitalized a few months ago. His health is very much in decline
3. This is unrealistic- the stadium in LA is happening and happening soon. The NFL has already said teams interested in relocating can file requests after the new year.
4. We've been over this- it's BS. Teams like Dallas, Philly, NE, Chicago, Washington, NY Giants, NY Jets, Green Bay, arguably San Fran and Detroit are NEVER moving. A bunch more have new stadiums with long-term leases and won't have a use for the "bargaining chip" for at least 10-15 years, during which they could be making more profit with a team in LA. And all the owners would LOVE to have a team in LA paying into the revenue sharing vs a team like Buffalo being a recipient of revenue sharing. The LA "bargaining chip" is only beneficial to a handful of teams, if that.

[Joe Fo Sho]

What about Goodell hinting about adding 2 or even 4 more teams to the playoffs in the future? This COULD mean that the NFL would add teams and LA would get a new team. Then no one has to move.

[OpIv37]

What about Goodell hinting about adding 2 or even 4 more teams to the playoffs in the future? This COULD mean that the NFL would add teams and LA would get a new team. Then no one has to move.

I don't know if adding teams is going to work. First, the league is already diluted by too many teams. Teams have no depth, and for most teams, one or two injuries to star players is the difference between making the playoffs and a top 10 draft pick. Second, the divisions align perfectly as it is. If you add 2 or even 4 teams, mathematically there is no way to do it without making some divisions with 5 teams and some with 4. This messes up scheduling and gives teams in 4 team divisions an unfair advantage for division titles.

[better days]

1. Bills & Erie county have been in negotiations for a long time. They aren't going well.
2. Ralph is dying. This is the first year he hasn't been able to make games, and he was hospitalized a few months ago. His health is very much in decline
3. This is unrealistic- the stadium in LA is happening and happening soon. The NFL has already said teams interested in relocating can file requests after the new year.
4. We've been over this- it's BS. Teams like Dallas, Philly, NE, Chicago, Washington, NY Giants, NY Jets, Green Bay, arguably San Fran and Detroit are NEVER moving. A bunch more have new stadiums with long-term leases and won't have a use for the "bargaining chip" for at least 10-15 years, during which they could be making more profit with a team in LA. And all the owners would LOVE to have a team in LA paying into the revenue sharing vs a team like Buffalo being a recipient of revenue sharing. The LA "bargaining chip" is only beneficial to a handful of teams, if that.

1. The negotiations are behind closed doors, you have no idea how they are going.
2.Ralph broke a hip. He will never fully recover from that & has lost mobility because of it. Other than the hip, he is said to be in good health. Like I said, he could live another 10 years. A broken hip does not equate to dying.
3.Unrealistic? What is unrealistic is people discussing a stadium in LA as if it exists. So far it is nothing but a pipe dream
4. The Rams at this very moment are using LA to try to get Stadium improvements. The LA bargaining chip benefits far more teams than not.

[trapezeus]

the transcript didn't read very well.

Kelly was a great qb. who knows what his business acumen is, but the fact he doesn't have a team of investors makes his words seem less likely that he can get a deal done. without enough money himself, why would a group want him there?

i read it as a guy who wants to believe as much as the next guy and that he may know a little something, but that he really isn't the driver of a plan. the fact he needs one year after ralph's passing to institute a plan is not good. the fact he doesn't know a single investor who is ready to swoop in and purchase the bills to stay in buffalo is not good.

the most cynical side of me says, he is trying to do what he can, but when the team is swooped away, he'll have great PR for fighting so hard. and then he'll go into politics in WNY and then NYS as a guy who was willing to fight.

[OpIv37]

1. The negotiations are behind closed doors, you have no idea how they are going.
2.Ralph broke a hip. He will never fully recover from that & has lost mobility because of it. Other than the hip, he is said to be in good health. Like I said, he could live another 10 years. A broken hip does not equate to dying.
3.Unrealistic? What is unrealistic is people discussing a stadium in LA as if it exists. So far it is nothing but a pipe dream
4. The Rams at this very moment are using LA to try to get Stadium improvements. The LA bargaining chip benefits far more teams than not.

1. If the negotiations were going well, they'd be done. The public comments from the county were NOT encouraging the last time they spoke about it.
2. Ralph has more than a broken hip going on. You're naive if you think that's his only health problem. He will not make it another 10 years.
3. The stadium in LA is in the works. It's going to happen. You can put your head in the sand and pretend it's not going to happen, but it's well underway and a lot of rich, powerful people have money invested in it. They aren't just going to let it die. It already has preliminary approvals.
4. The Rams are one team that benefits from revenue sharing. Your math is simply wrong on the number of owners that benefit from the LA "bargaining chip." I already gave you the list of teams that will never move. Add to those the number of teams that just got new stadiums and are in long term leases, and it's only a couple that really benefit from it. Most of them would benefit FAR more from another team paying into revenue sharing vs a team that receives the money. No owner is going to say "sure, I'll have one less team paying into the revenue pool and turn down revenue for the next 15 years so that I may be able to use LA as a bargaining chip in a stadium lease, assuming they don't already have a team by then." That's just ****ing stupid.

[Joe Fo Sho]

I don't know if adding teams is going to work. First, the league is already diluted by too many teams. Teams have no depth, and for most teams, one or two injuries to star players is the difference between making the playoffs and a top 10 draft pick. Second, the divisions align perfectly as it is. If you add 2 or even 4 teams, mathematically there is no way to do it without making some divisions with 5 teams and some with 4. This messes up scheduling and gives teams in 4 team divisions an unfair advantage for division titles.

Oh don't get me wrong, I would hate to have more teams in this league. I was just suggesting that Goodell's comments could be interpreted in a way that there could be more teams in the NFL in the future.

[better days]

1. If the negotiations were going well, they'd be done. The public comments from the county were NOT encouraging the last time they spoke about it.
2. Ralph has more than a broken hip going on. You're naive if you think that's his only health problem. He will not make it another 10 years.
3. The stadium in LA is in the works. It's going to happen. You can put your head in the sand and pretend it's not going to happen, but it's well underway and a lot of rich, powerful people have money invested in it. They aren't just going to let it die. It already has preliminary approvals.
4. The Rams are one team that benefits from revenue sharing. Your math is simply wrong on the number of owners that benefit from the LA "bargaining chip." I already gave you the list of teams that will never move. Add to those the number of teams that just got new stadiums and are in long term leases, and it's only a couple that really benefit from it. Most of them would benefit FAR more from another team paying into revenue sharing vs a team that receives the money. No owner is going to say "sure, I'll have one less team paying into the revenue pool and turn down revenue for the next 15 years so that I may be able to use LA as a bargaining chip in a stadium lease, assuming they don't already have a team by then." That's just ****ing stupid.

1. The fact they are ongoing is encouraging.
2. All reports are other than the hip, Ralph is in good health. If you KNOW of any other health problems he has, please share them. You are only speculating on his health & you have no idea what his health is just as you have no idea about how well the negotiations are going.
3. Until they start digging for footers, the building of a Stadium in LA is far from well underway. Like I said so far it is just a pipe dream.
4. NY, Dallas, Green Bay, Philadelphia & maybe one or two others are the only teams I can think of that don't benefit from LA not having a team. FAR more teams do. I don't care how many new stadiums there are today. Someday those teams will want improvements just as the Rams do NOW.

[OpIv37]

1. The fact they are ongoing is encouraging.
2. All reports are other than the hip, Ralph is in good health. If you KNOW of any other health problems he has, please share them. You are only speculating on his health & you have no idea what his health is just as you have no idea about how well the negotiations are going.
3. Until they start digging for footers, the building of a Stadium in LA is far from well underway. Like I said so far it is just a pipe dream.
4. NY, Dallas, Green Bay, Philadelphia & maybe one or two others are the only teams I can think of that don't benefit from LA not having a team. FAR more teams do. I don't care how many new stadiums there are today. Someday those teams will want improvements just as the Rams do NOW.

4. You're simply overestimating the "bargaining chip" effect. No good businessman is going to turn down additional revenue because they may or may not have a bargaining chip that they may or may not need "someday."

[trapezeus]

Op,

I agree, the lease stuff would be done if it were going well. having any short term deal like we do is a sign that someone is stalling. and based on the county's historical sweet heart deals, and their willingness to sign off on $100MM without details and no commitment to not expand toronto, makes it pretty evident that the bills are the one stalling.

and with any stadium being built in LA, there are a lot of concerns.

the one major thing that helps the bills stay put or in toronto is that moving cross country (Rams to StL) was a major expense that caused millions of dollars of unexpected cost. And the expansion team money didn't go to the rams as a result. I read that in an article a while ago. i forget the price tag. but it was probably in the $60-80MM if i kind of remember it.

So the chargers are the Bills of hte west with old stadium and no fickle fan base. they move alot easier and a lot cheaper.

The bills still could be whisked away to Toronto. and if they do, what the heck is renovating a stadium for $200MM where all the profits go to the team. hell, ralph even got payouts from the winter classic. that is ridiculous.

Jims comment that the next owners would deal with the stadium issue isn't a pro like he's trying to spin. Have any of you purchased a house and told that the needed renovations to the kitchen and master bath are up to you and you still paid full price for the house? that's what is being said.

[trapezeus]

i actually know of ralph's health issues. he's in good shape for a 94 year old man. but that he lives with a lot of pain. if you look at the ralph of 5 years ago to the one today, you'd notice a very visible change. he looks a lot more frail. he could go on 10 more years, but it wouldn't be surprising if he was gone during the off season.

this isn't like when we discussed the topic 5-10 years ago where he was just old and you had to think about it.

[OLDSRIP]

Yes, I know "the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" (in Sam Jackson Boondocks voice), but please tell me this: if Ralph has a plan for the team after his death, what benefit is there to keeping it on the down low? He's getting raked through the coals by the fans and the media, and a concrete plan to keep the team in Buffalo would allow him to live out his life as a hero regardless of how crappy the team does on the field. Keeping it silent adds no benefit whatsoever.[/QUOTE]

I hear you on that. I don't understand it either, it doesn't make sence.
but I don't believe for a second that there isn't a plan in place. No one would go to the grave at his age and leave a 800 million dollar company in limbo. Maybe the reason we don't hear anything is that it will be sold to the highest bidder. And he knows the heat he will take now will be severe. Or maybe Ralph is a joker and likes to surprise people. Maybe as mentioned above he will give it to Jim Kelly. That would sure be a surprise. Who knows, I sure don't.
But I bet there are specific instructions in some attorneys vault. It would be totally irresponsible not to be. And youndon't usually get to be filthy rich by being irresponsible.

[OpIv37]

I hear you on that. I don't understand it either, it doesn't make sence.
but I don't believe for a second that there isn't a plan in place. No one would go to the grave at his age and leave a 800 million dollar company in limbo. Maybe the reason we don't hear anything is that it will be sold to the highest bidder. And he knows the heat he will take now will be severe. Or maybe Ralph is a joker and likes to surprise people. Maybe as mentioned above he will give it to Jim Kelly. That would sure be a surprise. Who knows, I sure don't.
But I bet there are specific instructions in some attorneys vault. It would be totally irresponsible not to be. And youndon't usually get to be filthy rich by being irresponsible.

This is by far the most reasonable answer I've heard yet: whatever plan Ralph has in place doesn't guarantee that the Bills stay in Buffalo, which is why it's not public.

If it's true, I get it on one hand but it pisses me off on the other hand. If Ralph sells to an out-of-town bidder, his heirs might get $800mm for the team. If the team stays, they might only get $650mm because of the market, the stadium situation, etc.

From a pure business perspective, $150mm is a LOT to lose. But from a real world perspective, what is his family going to do with $800 million that they couldn't do with $650 million? $650 million is an ungodly amount of money- more than most of us can even wrap our heads around. Do we really need to lose our team so some people who already have $650 million can get another $150 million? **** that.

[SpikedLemonade]

i actually know of ralph's health issues. he's in good shape for a 94 year old man. but that he lives with a lot of pain. if you look at the ralph of 5 years ago to the one today, you'd notice a very visible change. he looks a lot more frail. he could go on 10 more years, but it wouldn't be surprising if he was gone during the off season.

this isn't like when we discussed the topic 5-10 years ago where he was just old and you had to think about it.

Yup.

[trapezeus]

i just don't get why you'd sell as the family.

I'd rather have a $650-800MM investment, where the profit is routinely $50MM if you do nothing. You have a county that prints money for you and covers your stadium expenses. It's clear you don't even have to field a winner to get ancillary sales in tickets and jerseys.

you can skimp on coaches and staff to keep the profit in your pocket. You play this game of "we'll move" to keep at least 50k of the seats sold. you keep dangling toronto for $100MM every 5 years.

Vs cashing out and leaving now.

i'd never give up that asset. even with taxes, if you can come up with a payment plan, which we know the government will do because it's a lot of money, you remain rich. The return on your dollars are less risky by owning the team than diversifying into other esoteric asset classes.

[SpikedLemonade]

...it will be sold to the highest bidder. And he knows the heat he will take now will be severe.....

That is THE plan (he said so a few years ago in a Buffalo News interview) and that IS the reason for the silence.

Just because the highest bidder wins does not mean the team will necessarily be relocated.

It does mean that a gun will be placed to the taxpayer's collective heads to build a new stadium under the threat the team will be moved in a few years after purchase.

[SpikedLemonade]

This is by far the most reasonable answer I've heard yet: whatever plan Ralph has in place doesn't guarantee that the Bills stay in Buffalo, which is why it's not public.

If it's true, I get it on one hand but it pisses me off on the other hand. If Ralph sells to an out-of-town bidder, his heirs might get $800mm for the team. If the team stays, they might only get $650mm because of the market, the stadium situation, etc.

From a pure business perspective, $150mm is a LOT to lose. But from a real world perspective, what is his family going to do with $800 million that they couldn't do with $650 million? $650 million is an ungodly amount of money- more than most of us can even wrap our heads around. Do we really need to lose our team so some people who already have $650 million can get another $150 million? **** that.

There is a huge estate tax bill due as well out of the sales proceeds since Ralph paid $25K for an asset now worth $850M.

Nonetheless there will be plenty of money left for Ralph's heirs.

[Skooby]

If his heirs can't survive on what's left in any case, they don't deserve it anyways. I mean my goodness, anything that's bigger than the highest single powerball winner ever would set a group up for life.

What if Ralph set this up that one group has already bought it with money down but have no current ownership, just the option for right of first refusal? That would be worth a huge chunk of change & it could explain why we hear nothing about a succession plan because it's already done.

[trapezeus]

i don't think it's that thought out. i think ralph found out a long time ago that if you say you'll move, you get politicians ears and you get the crowd to show up.

and then he realized he could pocket the money, have a cheap infrastructure in coaches and scouts and just threaten to move the team. so as profits went up, his expenses stayed the same. he got cash richer. and everytime we demand better, there is an aura of "don't ask too much, he'll leave!" This is also the strategy of the "job creators/tax arguement" in the fiscal cliff discussions.

they may have a plan, but if it's known, then he looks like a real idiot and i lets people just stay away until they make a good team.

[better days]

4. You're simply overestimating the "bargaining chip" effect. No good businessman is going to turn down additional revenue because they may or may not have a bargaining chip that they may or may not need "someday."

4. The question is not IF but WHEN they will need LA as a bargaining chip. And it is questionable how much additional revenue LA would bring. Of course everyone will want to go to the games to see & be seen when they are new, but if they SUCK for a long period as the Bills & other teams have done, the glitz will wear off, the pretty people will stop going & the Crips & Bloods will be fighting over control of the Stadium.

[Skooby]

4. The question is not IF but WHEN they will need LA as a bargaining chip. And it is questionable how much additional revenue LA would bring. Of course everyone will want to go to the games to see & be seen when they are new, but if they SUCK for a long period as the Bills & other teams have done, the glitz will wear off, the pretty people will stop going & the Crips & Bloods will be fighting over control of the Stadium.

Toss in some shoulder pad spikes & heavy metal themes within a few years, unless of course they adopt the old LA Kings purple / gold colors. Then I can see all potential manhood / testosterone leaving the stadium.

[OpIv37]

4. The question is not IF but WHEN they will need LA as a bargaining chip. And it is questionable how much additional revenue LA would bring. Of course everyone will want to go to the games to see & be seen when they are new, but if they SUCK for a long period as the Bills & other teams have done, the glitz will wear off, the pretty people will stop going & the Crips & Bloods will be fighting over control of the Stadium.

Well, it's not "when" because many teams are so entrenched in their current city that the "when" is so far in the future that it isn't even in their calculations. And, of course, there are other points that you are missing. LA could get an expansion team or another team in the meantime, so that bargaining chip isn't even guaranteed to be there. And, if you are correct about teams moving to LA, why do you think the cities negotiating with teams won't figure it out and call their bluff? If you can figure it out, you can be damn sure the politicians with their army of accountants and lawyers will. No good businessman is going to turn down guaranteed revenue for the possibility of a bargaining chip.

As far as the glitz wearing down, don't be so sure. The Skins have been just as Bills over the last decade, yet they sell out the entire season almost as soon as tickets go on sale. The demand is high enough that people buy the tickets early on the off chance that the team will be good. No one shows up in December when the Skins suck, but the tickets are purchased and the team has the money.

[better days]

Well, it's not "when" because many teams are so entrenched in their current city that the "when" is so far in the future that it isn't even in their calculations. And, of course, there are other points that you are missing. LA could get an expansion team or another team in the meantime, so that bargaining chip isn't even guaranteed to be there. And, if you are correct about teams moving to LA, why do you think the cities negotiating with teams won't figure it out and call their bluff? If you can figure it out, you can be damn sure the politicians with their army of accountants and lawyers will. No good businessman is going to turn down guaranteed revenue for the possibility of a bargaining chip.

As far as the glitz wearing down, don't be so sure. The Skins have been just as Bills over the last decade, yet they sell out the entire season almost as soon as tickets go on sale. The demand is high enough that people buy the tickets early on the off chance that the team will be good. No one shows up in December when the Skins suck, but the tickets are purchased and the team has the money.

The Stadium in St. Louis is not that old, but the Rams want improvements. ALL teams will want improvements sooner rather than later, it is the nature of the NFL. The Raiders moved from LA after the 1994 season. The Panthers & Jaguars came into existence in 1995. The Texans came into existence in 2002. IF the NFL wants a team in LA so bad why did LA not get one of those teams? NO team will go into LA unless a MAJORITY of NFL teams want one there.

Fans of the Skins are rabid diehards like fans of the Bills. Fathers & Mothers pass it down to sons & daughters. LA is a transient City like Tampa & Miami. That team will not have an OLD rabid fan base to draw upon when times are tough. When the glitz is gone the fans will be gone as well in LA & the NFL knows this.

[imbondz]

He wants the best for his already rich family, he doesn't care about the fan base. He won't sell the team, and when he dies it will become a bidding war. Guess how many people in Buffalo have enough money to outbid LA or Toronto? Yeah... no.

Why can't it be a bidding war while he's alive? His family will still get the estate.

[OpIv37]

The Stadium in St. Louis is not that old, but the Rams want improvements. ALL teams will want improvements sooner rather than later, it is the nature of the NFL. The Raiders moved from LA after the 1994 season. The Panthers & Jaguars came into existence in 1995. The Texans came into existence in 2002. IF the NFL wants a team in LA so bad why did LA not get one of those teams? NO team will go into LA unless a MAJORITY of NFL teams want one there.

Fans of the Skins are rabid diehards like fans of the Bills. Fathers & Mothers pass it down to sons & daughters. LA is a transient City like Tampa & Miami. That team will not have an OLD rabid fan base to draw upon when times are tough. When the glitz is gone the fans will be gone as well in LA & the NFL knows this.

You're killing your own argument here: LA isn't a good bargaining chip if the NFL has already made it clear that they don't want a team there. And have you ever been to DC? It's the ultimate transient city. I lived there for 10 years and maybe met 15 people who were actually from there. The majority of people in the area are from somewhere else. There are a ton of government and military people rotating through, and a bunch of other people who moved there from places with no jobs (like me).

[better days]

You're killing your own argument here: LA isn't a good bargaining chip if the NFL has already made it clear that they don't want a team there. And have you ever been to DC? It's the ultimate transient city. I lived there for 10 years and maybe met 15 people who were actually from there. The majority of people in the area are from somewhere else. There are a ton of government and military people rotating through, and a bunch of other people who moved there from places with no jobs (like me).

Do you think the fans of the Skins come only from DC? I know you are smarter than that. The NFL publicly states they want a team in LA & many people like you believe it, so they have that illusion in place.
,

[OpIv37]

Do you think the fans of the Skins come only from DC? I know you are smarter than that. The NFL publicly states they want a team in LA & many people like you believe it, so they have that illusion in place.
,

Yeah, I don't know why the NFL would want a team in the largest city/TV market in the country. That's just stupid.....

And yes, Skins fans are mainly only in the DC area. Maybe 25 or 30 years ago the Skins had fans in other places, but not now. Hell, they are even losing fans in southern MD- where their stadium is- to the Ravens because people under 20 or 25 years old don't even remember the Skins being good, whereas the Ravens have been good since they've been the Ravens. Yet, they still manage to sell out.

[stuckincincy]

Well, it's not "when" because many teams are so entrenched in their current city that the "when" is so far in the future that it isn't even in their calculations. And, of course, there are other points that you are missing. LA could get an expansion team or another team in the meantime, so that bargaining chip isn't even guaranteed to be there. And, if you are correct about teams moving to LA, why do you think the cities negotiating with teams won't figure it out and call their bluff? If you can figure it out, you can be damn sure the politicians with their army of accountants and lawyers will. No good businessman is going to turn down guaranteed revenue for the possibility of a bargaining chip.

As far as the glitz wearing down, don't be so sure. The Skins have been just as Bills over the last decade, yet they sell out the entire season almost as soon as tickets go on sale. The demand is high enough that people buy the tickets early on the off chance that the team will be good. No one shows up in December when the Skins suck, but the tickets are purchased and the team has the money.

I see your point about WAS being a losing franchise in recent years - but the big $ - lobbyists, beltway bandits, undisclosed gov't worker "perks"" etc. - you know the area better than I - guarantees the sell-outs no matter what.

I can't see BUF leaving. Whoever acquires the team will get a cash cow. The tv $ guarantees that. They will probably end up like MLB's Pirates, if not there already. Years and years of losing records - 17, IRRC. The game-day gate is only icing on an already-rich cake.

The NFL will expand. To LA, perhaps. I don't see BUF, JAX, or SD moving.

[OpIv37]

I see your point about WAS being a losing franchise in recent years - but the big $ - lobbyists, beltway bandits, undisclosed gov't worker "perks"" etc. - you know the area better than I - guarantees the sell-outs no matter what.

I can't see BUF leaving. Whoever acquires the team will get a cash cow. The tv $ guarantees that. They will probably end up like MLB's Pirates, if not there already. Years and years of losing records - 17, IRRC. The game-day gate is only icing on an already-rich cake.

The NFL will expand. To LA, perhaps. I don't see BUF, JAX, or SD moving.
I think it would be similar in LA with all the celebrities and entertainment companies.

[better days]

Yeah, I don't know why the NFL would want a team in the largest city/TV market in the country. That's just stupid.....

And yes, Skins fans are mainly only in the DC area. Maybe 25 or 30 years ago the Skins had fans in other places, but not now. Hell, they are even losing fans in southern MD- where their stadium is- to the Ravens because people under 20 or 25 years old don't even remember the Skins being good, whereas the Ravens have been good since they've been the Ravens. Yet, they still manage to sell out.

The Skins have more than enough fans that were Skins fans for YEARS in the surrounding STATES of DC. Tell us why LA did not get one of those expansion teams in the past if the NFL wanted one there? And don't say because of the lack of a Stadium. A Stadium could have been built yesterday as easily as tomorrow. Hell, the economy was much better in 1995 or 2002 than it is today.

[better days]

I think it would be similar in LA with all the celebrities and entertainment companies.

Celebrities are used to getting comped. They are not used to paying. Lobbyists pay for many of the Skins seats. Not the elected officials. AGAIN why has the NFL not put a team in LA after all this time if they REALLY wanted one there?

[OpIv37]

The Skins have more than enough fans that were Skins fans for YEARS in the surrounding STATES of DC. Tell us why LA did not get one of those expansion teams in the past if the NFL wanted one there? And don't say because of the lack of a Stadium. A Stadium could have been built yesterday as easily as tomorrow. Hell, the economy was much better in 1995 or 2002 than it is today.

Um, the DC metro area, which includes the surrounding states, doesn't have nearly as many people as LA AND it has two teams that both have overwhelming support.

And you just said that teams use LA as a bargaining chip, but now you are saying that the NFL doesn't want a team in LA. So, once again explain to me how LA is an effective bargaining chip...... your argument is coming off as desperately trying to convince yourself that the Bills won't move to LA. At first, you say owners benefit from having LA as a bargaining chip, but when I point out that the owners would benefit financially from having a team in LA, your argument becomes that the NFL doesn't really want a team in LA anyway or else one would already be there. So, how can it be a bargaining chip if the NFL doesn't want to be there?

The reality at the moment is that nothing is set in stone. The Bills aren't definitely moving, and if they do move it isn't definitely going to be to LA. But they aren't definitely staying, either. There is literally nothing keeping them in Buffalo past this season. With the way things are going, a move is a realistic possibility. I don't like it. I wish it weren't the case. But until the stadium situation and the post-Ralph ownership issues get resolved, there is nothing that guarantees the team will stay in Buffalo. It is what it is.

- - - Updated - - -


Celebrities are used to getting comped. They are not used to paying. Lobbyists pay for many of the Skins seats. Not the elected officials. AGAIN why has the NFL not put a team in LA after all this time if they REALLY wanted one there?

and you don't think entertainment companies are going to comp seats for celebrities when they are trying to get them to sign on for a movie or sign with their record label? Please.

[stuckincincy]

I think it would be similar in LA with all the celebrities and entertainment companies.

Likely so.

[better days]

Um, the DC metro area, which includes the surrounding states, doesn't have nearly as many people as LA AND it has two teams that both have overwhelming support.

And you just said that teams use LA as a bargaining chip, but now you are saying that the NFL doesn't want a team in LA. So, once again explain to me how LA is an effective bargaining chip...... your argument is coming off as desperately trying to convince yourself that the Bills won't move to LA. At first, you say owners benefit from having LA as a bargaining chip, but when I point out that the owners would benefit financially from having a team in LA, your argument becomes that the NFL doesn't really want a team in LA anyway or else one would already be there. So, how can it be a bargaining chip if the NFL doesn't want to be there?

The reality at the moment is that nothing is set in stone. The Bills aren't definitely moving, and if they do move it isn't definitely going to be to LA. But they aren't definitely staying, either. There is literally nothing keeping them in Buffalo past this season. With the way things are going, a move is a realistic possibility. I don't like it. I wish it weren't the case. But until the stadium situation and the post-Ralph ownership issues get resolved, there is nothing that guarantees the team will stay in Buffalo. It is what it is.

- - - Updated - - -



and you don't think entertainment companies are going to comp seats for celebrities when they are trying to get them to sign on for a movie or sign with their record label? Please.

Again, LA is FULL of transients. The VAST majority of Skins fans are NOT transient. I explained already that the NFL has the illusion in place of wanting a team in LA & people like you believe it so it is working.

And yes, no doubt entertainment companies would buy tickets. The thing is there are probably 1000 lobyists for every entertainment company. The numbers don't add up.

AGAIN........................ explain if the NFL REALLY wants a team in LA why there is not one there already.

[OpIv37]

Again, LA is FULL of transients. The VAST majority of Skins fans are NOT transient. I explained already that the NFL has the illusion in place of wanting a team in LA & people like you believe it so it is working.

And yes, no doubt entertainment companies would buy tickets. The thing is there are probably 1000 lobyists for every entertainment company. The numbers don't add up.

AGAIN........................ explain if the NFL REALLY wants a team in LA why there is not one there already.

The vast majority of people in DC ARE transients, just like LA, and they STILL have enough local support to sell out a 96,000 seat stadium, even during crappy seasons. I don't know why you think DC is less transient than LA- that's just crazy. I just told you- I lived and worked in the DC area for 10 years and the ENTIRE area is transient.

And you really think it's an illusion that the NFL wants a team in the biggest market in the country? You sound like a birther or a truther with that kind of nonsense.

I don't have a good explanation as to why there isn't a team there now, but talks of bringing a team there have been heating up lately, which would imply that the NFL DOES want a team there. Of course, in your mind that's irrelevant- it's all just a front so the Rams can get renovations to their stadium :snicker:

[Ed]

Again, LA is FULL of transients. The VAST majority of Skins fans are NOT transient. I explained already that the NFL has the illusion in place of wanting a team in LA & people like you believe it so it is working.

And yes, no doubt entertainment companies would buy tickets. The thing is there are probably 1000 lobyists for every entertainment company. The numbers don't add up.

AGAIN........................ explain if the NFL REALLY wants a team in LA why there is not one there already.
Maybe because it's complicated and there are a lot of issues at play. Of course the NFL wants a team in LA, but the situation and circumstances have to be right also.

[stuckincincy]

I'd guess Kelly still has a PR agent, who makes sure that he chirps up now and then to keep the name in front of the public. :mybills:

[better days]

The vast majority of people in DC ARE transients, just like LA, and they STILL have enough local support to sell out a 96,000 seat stadium, even during crappy seasons. I don't know why you think DC is less transient than LA- that's just crazy. I just told you- I lived and worked in the DC area for 10 years and the ENTIRE area is transient.

And you really think it's an illusion that the NFL wants a team in the biggest market in the country? You sound like a birther or a truther with that kind of nonsense.

I don't have a good explanation as to why there isn't a team there now, but talks of bringing a team there have been heating up lately, which would imply that the NFL DOES want a team there. Of course, in your mind that's irrelevant- it's all just a front so the Rams can get renovations to their stadium :snicker:

Maryland, Virginia,(aside from Norfolk/VA Beach) West Virginia, ETC. are NOT highly transient. The VAST MAJORITY of Skins fans are NOT transient. LA has had no team & therefore a new team would have NO fan base, it would have to be built from scratch, unless the team that moved there was the Rams, Raiders or Chargers, those teams would have some sort of fan base in place.

The reason the NFL is talking about a team in LA now is exactly to perpetuate the illusion it wants a team in LA while the Rams as well as the Chargers & Raiders negotiate with the Cities they are in. If the NFL REALLY wants a team in LA, at least one of those three teams should be committed to move there EARLY next year. All three of those teams have called LA home at some point in the past. We shall see what happens.

[OpIv37]

Maryland, Virginia,(aside from Norfolk/VA Beach) West Virginia, ETC. are NOT highly transient. The VAST MAJORITY of Skins fans are NOT transient. LA has had no team & therefore a new team would have NO fan base, it would have to be built from scratch, unless the team that moved there was the Rams, Raiders or Chargers, those teams would have some sort of fan base in place.

The reason the NFL is talking about a team in LA now is exactly to perpetuate the illusion it wants a team in LA while the Rams as well as the Chargers & Raiders negotiate with the Cities they are in. If the NFL REALLY wants a team in LA, at least one of those three teams should be committed to move there EARLY next year. All three of those teams have called LA home at some point in the past. We shall see what happens.
I'm sorry but that's utter bull****.

I lived in the area for 10 years and it's just not true. The MD and VA suburbs of DC are FULL of transients like me. And in MD, by the time you get out of the transient areas, you're in Ravens territory, not Skins territory. You just have no idea what you are talking about. Ask anyone who has lived in this area and they will tell you the exact same thing.

[Mr. Pink]

Again, LA is FULL of transients. The VAST majority of Skins fans are NOT transient. I explained already that the NFL has the illusion in place of wanting a team in LA & people like you believe it so it is working.

And yes, no doubt entertainment companies would buy tickets. The thing is there are probably 1000 lobyists for every entertainment company. The numbers don't add up.

AGAIN........................ explain if the NFL REALLY wants a team in LA why there is not one there already.

To think the NFL doesn't want a team in the second largest TV market in the country is downright idiotic.

The NFL is about business and money. Why would they want to go somewhere that will increase revenues?

Seriously. You need to rethink your viewpoint on the NFL just uses it as some kind of ploy.

[better days]

To think the NFL doesn't want a team in the second largest TV market in the country is downright idiotic.

The NFL is about business and money. Why would they want to go somewhere that will increase revenues?

Seriously. You need to rethink your viewpoint on the NFL just uses it as some kind of ploy.

OK, if I am wrong, there should be a team committed to play in LA EARLY next year. BOTH Oakland & the Chargers play in antiquated Stadiums far worse than the Ralph. The Chargers have had problems sellling out for years, even with a GOOD team & beautiful weather. Neither the Chargers or Raiders can get a deal done for a new Stadium in their current City. Both teams still have a fan base in LA. In addition, the Rams are threatening to move to back LA if St Louis does not meet their demands, even though they play in a fairly new Dome Stadium.

If I am wrong & LA is such a great opportunity & the NFL REALLY wants a team there, then at least one of those three teams should be committed to play there EARLY next year.

I can't wait to read the EXCUSES when that does not happen.

[better days]

I'm sorry but that's utter bull****.

I lived in the area for 10 years and it's just not true. The MD and VA suburbs of DC are FULL of transients like me. And in MD, by the time you get out of the transient areas, you're in Ravens territory, not Skins territory. You just have no idea what you are talking about. Ask anyone who has lived in this area and they will tell you the exact same thing.

My Son-inlaw was in the Navy & they lived in Va for 2 years. We visited them often. Aside from that I have been in that area for work many times in the past. There are transients, but not like in LA, Tampa or Miami.

And you are a bad case for your own argument. You lived in DC for 10 years & yet even though you CONSTANTLY complain about them, you are still a BILLS fan, NOT a SKINS fan. Yet you expect Bills, Giants, Jets, Bears, Etc fans living in the LA area to become fans of a new team in LA. LOL.

[OpIv37]

My Son-inlaw was in the Navy & they lived in Va for 2 years. We visited them often. Aside from that I have been in that area for work many times in the past. There are transients, but not like in LA, Tampa or Miami.

And you are a bad case for your own argument. You lived in DC for 10 years & yet even though you CONSTANTLY complain about them, you are still a BILLS fan, NOT a SKINS fan. Yet you expect Bills, Giants, Jets, Bears, Etc fans living in the LA area to become fans of a new team in LA. LOL.

LA has almost 4 million people in the city itself and 10 million in the metro area. You think ALL those people come from somewhere else and have an allegiance to another team? Bull****.

The Ravens' stadium is a 35 minute drive from the Skins stadium (if you don't hit traffic) but the Ravens have a strong fan base and had no problem attracting fans with another team right in their backyard (and keep in mind that the Redskins were only 5 years removed from a SB win when the Ravens came to town, so they were popular). DC is only slightly farther from Baltimore than that, yet the Nationals had no problem attracting fans when they came on board, despite the area being full of transients and lifelong fans of the Orioles as the "local" team.

And you're shooting your argument in the foot with the Miami and Tampa examples. Granted, their teams don't have the best support in the NFL, but they have more than enough support to remain profitable in transient cities a fraction the size of LA. And if LA is so full of transients who don't support the local team, how do they support two basketball teams, the Dodgers, the Kings, plus the Ducks and the Angels 30 miles away? This notion that fans in LA won't support a local football team because they're transients is utter nonsense. LA teams get plenty of support, and there are other transient cities that support the local football team.

[OpIv37]

And you are a bad case for your own argument. You lived in DC for 10 years & yet even though you CONSTANTLY complain about them, you are still a BILLS fan, NOT a SKINS fan. Yet you expect Bills, Giants, Jets, Bears, Etc fans living in the LA area to become fans of a new team in LA. LOL.

Also I'm not exactly sure I'm a representative example. My dad is from the Philly area and moved the family to Rochester because of his job in the early 80's. He still has a soft spot for the Philly teams, but he started following the Buffalo teams because in the early 80's, you pretty much HAD to follow the local team. There was no Internet or Sunday Ticket- the most you could get from out-of-town teams was a blurb on Sportscenter, if you had cable (and we didn't until the late 80's). When he moved to DC about 8 years ago, he took to the Nationals and Capitals (but he stuck with the Bills for football because he hates Snyder) because his generation is used to following the local team due to lack of available avenues for following out of town teams in the past.

When I was a kid and started getting into football, it was the early 90's: the heyday for the Bills. I developed a strong connection because of the geographic proximity and the success of the team. But not everyone has a local team and not every local team had that success to win over fans. A lot of people don't have a connection that runs as deep as that and would gladly follow a team in their adopted home town.

With people younger than me, sure, there is still team loyalty, but there are a lot more fantasy fans who care more about individual players than team. They consume football differently, preferring to follow as many games as possible than watch their team play a game end to end.

So, people in my age range who have relocated to a new city aren't exactly the target market for a new team, but that doesn't mean the market isn't there.

[better days]

Also I'm not exactly sure I'm a representative example. My dad is from the Philly area and moved the family to Rochester because of his job in the early 80's. He still has a soft spot for the Philly teams, but he started following the Buffalo teams because in the early 80's, you pretty much HAD to follow the local team. There was no Internet or Sunday Ticket- the most you could get from out-of-town teams was a blurb on Sportscenter, if you had cable (and we didn't until the late 80's). When he moved to DC about 8 years ago, he took to the Nationals and Capitals (but he stuck with the Bills for football because he hates Snyder) because his generation is used to following the local team due to lack of available avenues for following out of town teams in the past.

When I was a kid and started getting into football, it was the early 90's: the heyday for the Bills. I developed a strong connection because of the geographic proximity and the success of the team. But not everyone has a local team and not every local team had that success to win over fans. A lot of people don't have a connection that runs as deep as that and would gladly follow a team in their adopted home town.

With people younger than me, sure, there is still team loyalty, but there are a lot more fantasy fans who care more about individual players than team. They consume football differently, preferring to follow as many games as possible than watch their team play a game end to end.

So, people in my age range who have relocated to a new city aren't exactly the target market for a new team, but that doesn't mean the market isn't there.

Well, as I have said before, if I am wrong then either the Chargers, Raiders or Rams should have a commitment to play in LA ahortly after the new year. Don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen.

[Historian]

I've been told by attorney friends in town that the succession plan is in place, and the team is not going anywhere.

This is from a couple guys whose firm does work for the Bills from time to time.

:idunno:

[OpIv37]

I've been told by attorney friends in town that the succession plan is in place, and the team is not going anywhere.

This is from a couple guys whose firm does work for the Bills from time to time.

:idunno:

If true, I'd still like to know why they are keeping it a secret. You'd think Ralph would want to go out a hero instead of listening to us bash him all the time.

[TedMock]

From 2000-2010 Census. It's not specific to transient population, so births would be included, for example, but it gives a rough idea.

16085

[better days]

If true, I'd still like to know why they are keeping it a secret. You'd think Ralph would want to go out a hero instead of listening to us bash him all the time.

Could just be Ralphs personality. He has done many things in his lifetime in secret with no fanfare that the public did not find out about until much later. He helped save some teams & even the entire AFL from folding for example. He has also given money to people in need & to worthy Charities.

[trapezeus]

i think it's a secret because it keeps 50,000 in the seats which pads his pockets. this isn't a movie, OP. You don't go 90+ years as a miser and then open your eyes. he enjoys making that money. he enjoys pocketing the difference and he kind of hopes he wins.

if the succession plan is well know...how many on this board just say, "next year." and go about their life. but we all live in fear that we are losing a team if we don't watch this team.

and because he has this card, he plays it at the lease negotiations. What other business has a model where all costs of major infrastructure is financed by another entity without payment from the private business. and then the private business collects all the revenue from the financed entity? How does he get parking and payment from NHL winter classic?

[OpIv37]

i think it's a secret because it keeps 50,000 in the seats which pads his pockets. this isn't a movie, OP. You don't go 90+ years as a miser and then open your eyes. he enjoys making that money. he enjoys pocketing the difference and he kind of hopes he wins.

if the succession plan is well know...how many on this board just say, "next year." and go about their life. but we all live in fear that we are losing a team if we don't watch this team.

and because he has this card, he plays it at the lease negotiations. What other business has a model where all costs of major infrastructure is financed by another entity without payment from the private business. and then the private business collects all the revenue from the financed entity? How does he get parking and payment from NHL winter classic?

Well that's another thing: how done could a plan be with no lease in place? What kind of investor is going to commit with that much uncertainty?

[trapezeus]

Well that's another thing: how done could a plan be with no lease in place? What kind of investor is going to commit with that much uncertainty?

they buy and take the gun out of ralph's hands and hold it themselves. "we bought this team, but to stay in buffalo we need (insert wishlist here)" The state bends over backwards to get them the stadium they want.

if the buyers have some other business in the area, they might want to select the land to be purchased (ie it may be a land developer that wants their lot purchased from state at inflated price).

and if they don't get what they want, they flip the $600MM investment to LA or Toronto and make a couple $100MM in the process.

[stuckincincy]

I wish Kelly would stop with his self-promoting and dry up and blow away. He and Marv came up small in 4 consecutive Super Bowls. Why both of them are in the HOF is a mystery to me.

[mybills]

Not going to happen, plain and simple.

I've already said my goodbyes.
Go G-Men!

[better days]

they buy and take the gun out of ralph's hands and hold it themselves. "we bought this team, but to stay in buffalo we need (insert wishlist here)" The state bends over backwards to get them the stadium they want.

if the buyers have some other business in the area, they might want to select the land to be purchased (ie it may be a land developer that wants their lot purchased from state at inflated price).

and if they don't get what they want, they flip the $600MM investment to LA or Toronto and make a couple $100MM in the process.

The developer does not need the State to inflate the price of the land the stadium will sit on as long as they own SURROUNDING land to that Stadium. The value of that land will increase exponentially.