I Think Terry Pegula Wants To Bring The Super Bowl To Buffalo

[BillsImpossible]

Just as much as he wants to win the Stanley Cup.

Terry loves Buffalo. He is a true homer. I don't want anyone else to be the next owner of the Buffalo Bills.

I get the feeling that Terry wants to build a new stadium downtown, with one guarantee from the NFL.

If he buys the team and guarantees to build a new stadium in less than a decade, Buffalo gets to host a Super Bowl within the next 10 years.

There will be plenty of hotel space by then.....and the NFL's criteria to host the big game will be satisfied.

Why does he want to bring a Super Bowl to Buffalo?

Terry is in the real estate business just as much as the oil and gas industry.

I think he knows that Buffalo is a great blank slate of a city with so much future potential to build on.

There's no reason why Buffalo should not be just as successful as Toronto.

Buying the Buffalo Bills is a great business opportunity.

Buffalo is like a great restaurant in desperate need of a fresh 21st century business model makeover.

The Sabres just submitted a proposal to host the NHL Combine for the next 3 years. It took 2 years to prepare.

The Sabres want to replace Toronto as the combine's host. That's worth repeating.

The Sabres want to replace Toronto as the combine's host.

Why?

The NHL Combine generates a lot of business. A lot of people attend the NHL Combine, and they all need a place to eat, sleep, and have fun.

Every team in the NHL has a staff that attends the combine. Players and their families or friends attend the combine. Media from all over America and Canada go to the combine, and the NHL's TV ratings are on the rise. NBC is very happy. The NHL is growing, "market share," is increasing, and Terry Pegula's Buffalo Sabres are worth more now than what he purchased the team for.

You have to spend money to make money.

Negative Nancy's say that city's lose money on Super Bowls.

Tell that to the parking lot attendants, street vendors, restaurant owners and their employees, hotel owners and their employees, private security companies and their employees, insurance companies and their agents, bartenders, every bar and strip joint owner, police getting paid overtime, the lawyers and the State taxes generated that all benefit from a huge influx of business.

Buffalo means business.

[OpIv37]

He can want anything.

Actually making it happen is a different story.

[BillsImpossible]

He can want anything.

Actually making it happen is a different story.

The Trust matters most. 4 people. Who do they all trust the most to never say goodbye and keep the Bills in Buffalo?

Sorry, Jon Bon.

[BuffaloWingEater]

before i read your post i was like no ****, of course he wants the bills to win the super bowl :crazy:

anyway, i want pegula as the owner. he is a buffalo homer and literally a gift from heaven.

[swiper]

Like he wants the Stanley Cup? The way he started going about that, by throwing a load of his money at Ville Leino, leaves me doubtful of his abilities.

[Don't Panic]

I'm so confused... is BillsImpossible the same person as Mitch Murray Downtown? Or is it that they are just closely related? Could it be that there are two people who start threads (many, many threads) in an extremely similar way? I didn't sleep last night bouncing around the possibilities. I'm stumped.

[BertSquirtgum]

Pegula for the win.

[Dr. Who]

Like he wants the Stanley Cup? The way he started going about that, by throwing a load of his money at Ville Leino, leaves me doubtful of his abilities.

I answered your negativity in another post. Pegula was a bit naive when he started, but he's never been cheap. He corrected course and is now pursuing an intelligent path to building a long-term winner in the NHL.

[Jan Reimers]

He can want anything.

Actually making it happen is a different story.

On the other hand, being worth $3.3 Billion can make many of your wishes come true.

[Fletch]

I Think Terry Pegula Wants To Bring The Super Bowl To Buffalo Just as much as he wants to win the Stanley Cup.

How encouraging. I hope he can do for the Bills what he's done for the Sabers. Oh, wait ....

I think I remember reading last week how Buffalo was on the covers of Forbes and the Wall Street Journal as most attractive cities to relocate or start businesses in. Toronto has nothing on Buffalo.

- - - Updated - - -


I answered your negativity in another post. Pegula was a bit naive when he started, but he's never been cheap. He corrected course and is now pursuing an intelligent path to building a long-term winner in the NHL.

Didn't Tom Donahoe say something similar 14 years ago, and then Marv Levy a few years after that.

[Fletch]

I'm so confused... is BillsImpossible the same person as Mitch Murray Downtown? Or is it that they are just closely related? Could it be that there are two people who start threads (many, many threads) in an extremely similar way? I didn't sleep last night bouncing around the possibilities. I'm stumped.

Lotsa posts and opinions here leave me stumped.

[Fletch]

One more thing, Buffalo has more rainbows and leprechauns than any other city in the country. No, no, than any other city in the world! Yeah!

[Dr. Who]

How encouraging. I hope he can do for the Bills what he's done for the Sabers. Oh, wait ....

I think I remember reading last week how Buffalo was on the covers of Forbes and the Wall Street Journal as most attractive cities to relocate or start businesses in. Toronto has nothing on Buffalo.

- - - Updated - - -



Didn't Tom Donahoe say something similar 14 years ago, and then Marv Levy a few years after that.

Of course, Donahoe and Levy have zero relevance to Pegula. My fuller argument is in another thread. Not that you are particularly interested in logic or rational arguments.
Strange, the perverse pleasure many seem to derive from casting gloom wherever they go.

[Fletch]

Of course, Donahoe and Levy have zero relevance to Pegula. My fuller argument is in another thread. Not that you are particularly interested in logic or rational arguments.
Strange, the perverse pleasure many seem to derive from casting gloom wherever they go.

I'm entirely interested in rational arguments and logic. Unfortunately anything related to this topic that claims that Buffalo is a more attractive city than cities like Toronto or even most others that have even sniffed at hosting an NFL team don't contain that logic or rational arguments.

The only people in the world that think that Buffalo is the best city for an NFL team of other options, are those that either live here or grew up here and have connections to the area. There's a reason why many don't live there anymore and have moved out of state. It's not because they like the geographical areas better, necessarily. If we didn't fit that criteria then we wouldn't think that either, let's face it.

Otherwise, do you really think that the 31 other owners don't share the same exact viewpoints that BI claims Pegula does? Of course you know that they do. So let's rehash that logic and rational arguments statement now.

Talk is cheap my friend. As to casting gloom, Wilson, his chosen front office, and the others put in place by them are the ones that cast the gloom, we just sit here and call a spade a spade.

Yeah yeah, I realize that we're going to be 10-6 next season and make the playoffs, and Watkins is going to shatter records as a rookie, Manuel's going to stay healthy and for the first time in his collegiate and pro career not be plagued by inaccuracy issues, and that Spiller's going to, for no reason, revert to his 2012 self and not what he was in 2010, 2011, or 2013, and that Fred Jackson's going to play like a spry young chicken, that Marrone for the first time in his coaching career is actually going to be beating competitive teams on a regular basis, etc.

I get all that. Unfortunately people like you have been lecturing those of us that report, not cast, merely report, this so-called doom-and-gloom for years. To date it's never happened.

Odds of it really happening this season?

Otherwise, sorry, but I didn't see a link to any other thread here, and unlike others that post here, presumably you included, I have other things to do in life besides hit every single thread with some kind of obscure title to it and go through every post just to make sure that my life is complete.

[Fletch]

My fuller argument is in another thread.

By the way, if you have a point to make, I suggest that you do it in the thread in question.

Otherwise, go ahead, throw out the link. I'll take a look at it and see how much logic and rational argumentation is involved for you.

[Dr. Who]

By the way, if you have a point to make, I suggest that you do it in the thread in question.

Otherwise, go ahead, throw out the link. I'll take a look at it and see how much logic and rational argumentation is involved for you.

It's post #48 in the Pegula will in fact bid on the Bills thread. I am not savvy about computers and don't know how to link. Otherwise I would have done so.

As for your long message prior, I was only commenting on your view of Pegula and what he has done with the Sabres. All that other stuff regarding differing views of the city of Buffalo is a different argument. I haven't commented on that and I am at work, so I don't have time to do so. No doubt our basic temperaments and takes are likely to be contrary.

[WagonCircler]

How encouraging. I hope he can do for the Bills what he's done for the Sabers.

Nothing makes you look like an idiot more than misspelling a punchline.

[YardRat]

Well I hope so, otherwise I'd prefer he not bid at all.

[lightningbolt444]

Do people in Buffalo actually think people in other parts of the country want to come to Buffalo in February? Or at all for that matter. You can say whatever you want about the city coming back and how they are turning things around blah blah but fact remains the rest of the country does not have a fond viewpoint of Buffalo.
We all know Buffalo has many good things about it however it is all about perception.

Its a great city but the people that live\lived there tend to be the only ones that think that way.

[Crisis]

The people who use the Sabres being in last place as a knock on Pegula really have no idea what they're talking about.

[Albany,n.y.]

I don't understand why the OP thinks investors would build enough motels to meet the NFL's standards for a Super Bowl. Nobody is building a hotel or motel for 1 event. Real Estate investors will look at the overall picture and with enough hotels to meet the NFL standard for a Super Bowl there will be a lot of empty rooms throughout the years & they will lose money & close. The developers understand this and will not build the extra lodging to begin with.

[DynaPaul]

Honestly, nowadays if you build a brand new high-tech stadium you're pretty much guaranteed at least one Super Bowl there.

[Fletch]

I don't understand why the OP thinks investors would build enough motels to meet the NFL's standards for a Super Bowl. Nobody is building a hotel or motel for 1 event. Real Estate investors will look at the overall picture and with enough hotels to meet the NFL standard for a Super Bowl there will be a lot of empty rooms throughout the years & they will lose money & close. The developers understand this and will not build the extra lodging to begin with.

Apparently you don't understand message board economics.

:D

- - - Updated - - -


Honestly, nowadays if you build a brand new high-tech stadium you're pretty much guaranteed at least one Super Bowl there.

And all the sales and occupancy taxes collected on that day will cover the stadium's financing. LOL

[Fletch]

The people who use the Sabres being in last place as a knock on Pegula really have no idea what they're talking about.

Why?

[Fletch]

It's post #48 in the Pegula will in fact bid on the Bills thread. I am not savvy about computers and don't know how to link. Otherwise I would have done so.

As for your long message prior, I was only commenting on your view of Pegula and what he has done with the Sabres. All that other stuff regarding differing views of the city of Buffalo is a different argument. I haven't commented on that and I am at work, so I don't have time to do so. No doubt our basic temperaments and takes are likely to be contrary.

You just go to the page with the thread on it, cut and paste that link here.


Sigh. Pegula did not make a mess of the Sabres. He gave the guys in place money and a chance to prove themselves. When he saw it wasn't working, he changed the GM and the coach. It's easy to be mediocre bad in the NHL. If you want to be elite, the most rational path is to really suck long enough to get 2 or 3 elite players through the draft and quite a few next level. The Sabres will probably get Sam Reinhart in this upcoming draft, the best offensive playmaker available. They should be bad next year so that they maximize their chances at McDavid, a once in a generation player (the next Sidney Crosby). There is a lot of young talent in the pipeline. It takes years to develop. Hockey is more like baseball than football in this respect. You will miss on over 50% of your prospects.

In short, Pegula is properly building a team that could seriously contend for the Cup for six to eight years if Murray makes good choices. No reason to doubt the current GM at this point.

OK, so let's address your "logic and rational arguments" in this.

Implicit in your statement is that Pegula wouldn't do the same thing with the Bills. How do you come to that conclusion? What, you imply that he now thinks that he shouldn't have trusted those that were running the team, but that now he'll never trust anyone ever again in business matters? Does that seem rational or logical?

What's Pegula doing now that's guaranteed to work and demonstrative that he's finally doing it the right way? Can we expect results this season, next? (Frankly I never have been a huge Sabres fan, so I'm somewhat in the dark about the nuances of Sabres management. Anyone can see that they finished as bottom-dwellers the last two seasons though and among the worst teams in the league.

Here's the thing though, plenty of fans seem to be able to see what the problems were, and what should and shouldn't have been done, and I've seen many complain about those very things at the time that they were done. So what now, Pegula couldn't see this himself and raise questions? He continued to trust people that were doing it if he did? Are those logical assumptions? Is that rational thinking?

I view it as being purely speculative and assumptive at best and ridiculous otherwise.

You talk about getting this guy Reinhart in the upcoming Draft, presumably they wouldn't be in a position to get him if they hadn't sucked.

Either way, your "logic and rational thinking" have entirely failed to explain why a guy like Pegula wouldn't simply leave the current Front Office in place with the Bills if he were in charge. Or did we miss that? No, I don't see that I did based on post #48 from that thread.

It also completely fails to provide the "logic and rational thinking" behind what makes Pegula knowledgeable about the NFL and management therein.

But here's the thing, where's the "logic and rational thinking" that shows that Pegula's encore with the Sabres will result any differently?

If you ask me, it sounds like there's at least as much chance if not more that should Pegula buy the Bills that little would change.

Go ahead, show me where your "logic and rational thinking" demonstrate otherwise. ... when you're not at work of course.

[better days]

Why?

It has already been explained why to you.

You are just too dense to get it.

[better days]

If you ask me, it sounds like there's at least as much chance if not more that should Pegula buy the Bills that little would change.


Well you are right about one thing, little would change in regards to the Bills staying put in Buffalo.

I can't wait until the team is sold & all the psuedo Bills fans that want to see the team moved have to SHUT UP.

[YardRat]

Pegula brought back Ted Nolan...if he buys the Bills, maybe somebody should start looking for where Greg Williams stashed his bullhorn.

[Dr. Who]

You just go to the page with the thread on it, cut and paste that link here.



OK, so let's address your "logic and rational arguments" in this.

Implicit in your statement is that Pegula wouldn't do the same thing with the Bills. How do you come to that conclusion? What, you imply that he now thinks that he shouldn't have trusted those that were running the team, but that now he'll never trust anyone ever again in business matters? Does that seem rational or logical?

What's Pegula doing now that's guaranteed to work and demonstrative that he's finally doing it the right way? Can we expect results this season, next? (Frankly I never have been a huge Sabres fan, so I'm somewhat in the dark about the nuances of Sabres management. Anyone can see that they finished as bottom-dwellers the last two seasons though and among the worst teams in the league.

Here's the thing though, plenty of fans seem to be able to see what the problems were, and what should and shouldn't have been done, and I've seen many complain about those very things at the time that they were done. So what now, Pegula couldn't see this himself and raise questions? He continued to trust people that were doing it if he did? Are those logical assumptions? Is that rational thinking?

I view it as being purely speculative and assumptive at best and ridiculous otherwise.

You talk about getting this guy Reinhart in the upcoming Draft, presumably they wouldn't be in a position to get him if they hadn't sucked.

Either way, your "logic and rational thinking" have entirely failed to explain why a guy like Pegula wouldn't simply leave the current Front Office in place with the Bills if he were in charge. Or did we miss that? No, I don't see that I did based on post #48 from that thread.

It also completely fails to provide the "logic and rational thinking" behind what makes Pegula knowledgeable about the NFL and management therein.

But here's the thing, where's the "logic and rational thinking" that shows that Pegula's encore with the Sabres will result any differently?

If you ask me, it sounds like there's at least as much chance if not more that should Pegula buy the Bills that little would change.

Go ahead, show me where your "logic and rational thinking" demonstrate otherwise. ... when you're not at work of course.


I think if you were a die-hard hockey fan and were aware of the true state of the current Sabres in terms of the good young players they are developing and the good young players they are likely to get in the next two seasons, you would have a more sanguine view of the team. Of course, any strategy comes with risk. On the whole, Pegula's current way of operating the Sabres gives reason for optimism. To be honest, I was strictly trying to limit myself to the Sabres. I see that in the context of the thread, one would imagine I was making a further case about the Bills.

Your overall dispute with me turns out to be accurate, in any event. I like Whaley and I like the way the team is shaping up. I haven't felt this optimistic about the front office people since the Polian days. Hence, I would not want Pegula to just come in and clean house. It makes sense to me that -- unless you have already concluded that the current situation is a disaster -- that you allow some time to evaluate what you have before giving everyone a pink slip.

I could actually broach subjects like logic and reason at a high philosophical level. That is part of my academic training, but such arguments would be abstruse and unhelpful in this context. It might irritate you as well. In my opinion, to stick with logic only, initial premises are not derived from pure reason or rules of logic. Logic works upon presupposed givens. You may be quite logical. I could be logical as well. If our starting points strongly differ, we will draw contrary conclusions.

Thank you for the info on cutting and pasting a link.

[BertSquirtgum]

You just go to the page with the thread on it, cut and paste that link here.



OK, so let's address your "logic and rational arguments" in this.

Implicit in your statement is that Pegula wouldn't do the same thing with the Bills. How do you come to that conclusion? What, you imply that he now thinks that he shouldn't have trusted those that were running the team, but that now he'll never trust anyone ever again in business matters? Does that seem rational or logical?

What's Pegula doing now that's guaranteed to work and demonstrative that he's finally doing it the right way? Can we expect results this season, next? (Frankly I never have been a huge Sabres fan, so I'm somewhat in the dark about the nuances of Sabres management. Anyone can see that they finished as bottom-dwellers the last two seasons though and among the worst teams in the league.

Here's the thing though, plenty of fans seem to be able to see what the problems were, and what should and shouldn't have been done, and I've seen many complain about those very things at the time that they were done. So what now, Pegula couldn't see this himself and raise questions? He continued to trust people that were doing it if he did? Are those logical assumptions? Is that rational thinking?

I view it as being purely speculative and assumptive at best and ridiculous otherwise.

You talk about getting this guy Reinhart in the upcoming Draft, presumably they wouldn't be in a position to get him if they hadn't sucked.

Either way, your "logic and rational thinking" have entirely failed to explain why a guy like Pegula wouldn't simply leave the current Front Office in place with the Bills if he were in charge. Or did we miss that? No, I don't see that I did based on post #48 from that thread.

It also completely fails to provide the "logic and rational thinking" behind what makes Pegula knowledgeable about the NFL and management therein.

But here's the thing, where's the "logic and rational thinking" that shows that Pegula's encore with the Sabres will result any differently?

If you ask me, it sounds like there's at least as much chance if not more that should Pegula buy the Bills that little would change.

Go ahead, show me where your "logic and rational thinking" demonstrate otherwise. ... when you're not at work of course.

Stop writing short stories. This is a message board not a newspaper.

[Fletch]

Stop writing short stories. This is a message board not a newspaper.

And you have to read them why now?

[Fletch]

I think if you were a die-hard hockey fan and were aware of the true state of the current Sabres in terms of the good young players they are developing and the good young players they are likely to get in the next two seasons, you would have a more sanguine view of the team. Of course, any strategy comes with risk. On the whole, Pegula's current way of operating the Sabres gives reason for optimism. To be honest, I was strictly trying to limit myself to the Sabres. I see that in the context of the thread, one would imagine I was making a further case about the Bills.

Your overall dispute with me turns out to be accurate, in any event. I like Whaley and I like the way the team is shaping up. I haven't felt this optimistic about the front office people since the Polian days. Hence, I would not want Pegula to just come in and clean house. It makes sense to me that -- unless you have already concluded that the current situation is a disaster -- that you allow some time to evaluate what you have before giving everyone a pink slip.

I could actually broach subjects like logic and reason at a high philosophical level. That is part of my academic training, but such arguments would be abstruse and unhelpful in this context. It might irritate you as well. In my opinion, to stick with logic only, initial premises are not derived from pure reason or rules of logic. Logic works upon presupposed givens. You may be quite logical. I could be logical as well. If our starting points strongly differ, we will draw contrary conclusions.

Thank you for the info on cutting and pasting a link.

No problem. Thanks for the civil discourse relatively speaking.

I still don't see where logic or rational thinking was interjected though and this response also didn't explain it. Just sayin' since you brought it up.


Your overall dispute with me turns out to be accurate, in any event. I like Whaley and I like the way the team is shaping up. I haven't felt this optimistic about the front office people since the Polian days. Hence, I would not want Pegula to just come in and clean house. It makes sense to me that -- unless you have already concluded that the current situation is a disaster -- that you allow some time to evaluate what you have before giving everyone a pink slip.

It seems that this is a critical point of contention.

The "current situation" is Manuel not making an enormous leap this year away from the mentioned disaster.

I have no idea what's optimistic about a front office that more or less has been in place for eons, and even with Whaley, since 2010 and with only minor tweaks otherwise. Whaley's been Asst. GM and top-dog re: personnel since 2010. I know that no one wants to tag him with any of our massive and glaring failures since then because he wasn't GM, but the fact is that he was the highest level person in charge of personnel, that's exactly what he was hired for. So holding him responsible, ultimately, for our drafts and free agency periods for five seasons running including this one is certainly reasonable.

Either way, he chose Manuel last year and reached for him despite other wisdom all over the place. This year he traded away next year's 1st for Watkins. I'd have taken Evans, IMO he'll have both a better rookie season and better NFL career. The front office otherwise has already proven itself incompetent. It has nothing to do with the money since they've spent it, foolishly, on players that don't deserve it. There should be no argument there and you won't find too many people to agree with you there with perhaps the singular exception of Whaley, but I'm not sure that most fans think that Whaley's done much but collect a paycheck over the last five years when clearly what I said above has been the case.

I can't disagree with you more on the way that the team is shaping up.

Jackson's gone after the season and who knows to what extent he'll be useful this season.

Dareus isn't likely to come back now.

Who knows what Spiller's status is, but he's no F/T RB anyway, which we need now.

It's only on a team with a success starved fan base like ours that players like Dixon, Brown, Corey Williams, and Rivers are welcomed as if they're anything but warm bodies.

Everyone else is overreacting and overemphasizing a group of young and inexperienced receivers, and another problem laden one that has never been dominant, as if it's shoe-in that they're going to become the next premier group of WRs in the league. I don't understand it. And when anyone suggests, for valid and identified reasons, that it's not likely to happen that way, they get slammed.

I think at the end of the season you'll have a different take. I'm just curious if it works out that way what your take on the FO and Whaley, not to mention Marrone, Manuel, and Watkins, etc. will be.

I hope you're right, I simply don't see any reason for the team to come together. I've posted many reasons why hoping on Watkins to be worth what we gave up in the Draft is ridiculous, and how Spikes isn't going to make the kind of difference that we need.

The bottom line is that unless Manuel can become a consistent QB that hits Watkins and his other receivers in stride on a regular basis, the basis for the hope that you cite is unfounded. Unfortunately Manuel hasn't been that QB either at FSU or here. For people to suggest that all of a sudden he's going to become that is baseless.

Watkins I view very much in the same way that I viewed Spiller when we drafted him. Both come from the same program and played under the same coach. It's a system, offensively anyway, that relies heavily on mismatches in talent by Clemson's skill position players and defenders. Both Watkins and Spiller only performed above average against inferior competition. I've laid the facts and basis out for that a number of times.

Unfortunately those mismatches don't exist, or definitely not at the level that they did at Clemson, which is exactly why Spiller hasn't done here what many were hoping and what he did at Clemson. Everything I read, study, or analyze tells me the exact same thing about Watkins. Bubble screens won't work in the NFL and he made a name on them at Clemson, they were his biggest plays. Also, Manuel sucks at the short stuff an screens and the like, whereas that was where Watkins bread was buttered.

One of the more relevant negatives on Watkins is his route running, so now we have a QB that isn't accurate on deep balls and a rookie WR that's got route running issues. Yet, absolutely no one here sees any pending issues. OK I guess Manuel's just going to blindly loft up the football and like neighborhood ball Watkins is going to go shag them.

I've said it numerous times and I'll say it again and stand by it insofar as is possible, this group of WRs with its youth and inexperience is going to struggle this season with a QB that will no longer have any fan support by week 10. If that's a recipe for playoffs, then I don't know what to say. To me it's a recipe for being 5-11.

I'll bookmark this thread and we'll come back to it later on this season.

[WagonCircler]

Pegula brought back Ted Nolan...if he buys the Bills, maybe somebody should start looking for where Greg Williams stashed his bullhorn.

I think he would bring back Bill Polian as CEO, actually.

Bill Polian>>>>>>>Russ Brandon

[Homegrown]

I don't understand why the OP thinks investors would build enough motels to meet the NFL's standards for a Super Bowl. Nobody is building a hotel or motel for 1 event. .

For the Winter Olympics in Sochi, to accommodate all the folk for "1 event", they anchored a bunch of state of the art cruise ships in the Sochi Harbor ...can that be done in Buffalo Harbor?

...however, if the stadium is built in Niagara Falls, that idea might be problematic ...

[Fletch]

I think he would bring back Bill Polian as CEO, actually.



Can't tell if you're serious or joking, but Polian's days are over. I wouldn't want him anymore.

[WagonCircler]

Can't tell if you're serious or joking, but Polian's days are over. I wouldn't want him anymore.

Awww. How cute.

You seem to actually think I give a **** about your opinion.

[BertSquirtgum]

No problem. Thanks for the civil discourse relatively speaking.

I still don't see where logic or rational thinking was interjected though and this response also didn't explain it. Just sayin' since you brought it up.



It seems that this is a critical point of contention.

The "current situation" is Manuel not making an enormous leap this year away from the mentioned disaster.

I have no idea what's optimistic about a front office that more or less has been in place for eons, and even with Whaley, since 2010 and with only minor tweaks otherwise. Whaley's been Asst. GM and top-dog re: personnel since 2010. I know that no one wants to tag him with any of our massive and glaring failures since then because he wasn't GM, but the fact is that he was the highest level person in charge of personnel, that's exactly what he was hired for. So holding him responsible, ultimately, for our drafts and free agency periods for five seasons running including this one is certainly reasonable.

Either way, he chose Manuel last year and reached for him despite other wisdom all over the place. This year he traded away next year's 1st for Watkins. I'd have taken Evans, IMO he'll have both a better rookie season and better NFL career. The front office otherwise has already proven itself incompetent. It has nothing to do with the money since they've spent it, foolishly, on players that don't deserve it. There should be no argument there and you won't find too many people to agree with you there with perhaps the singular exception of Whaley, but I'm not sure that most fans think that Whaley's done much but collect a paycheck over the last five years when clearly what I said above has been the case.

I can't disagree with you more on the way that the team is shaping up.

Jackson's gone after the season and who knows to what extent he'll be useful this season.

Dareus isn't likely to come back now.

Who knows what Spiller's status is, but he's no F/T RB anyway, which we need now.

It's only on a team with a success starved fan base like ours that players like Dixon, Brown, Corey Williams, and Rivers are welcomed as if they're anything but warm bodies.

Everyone else is overreacting and overemphasizing a group of young and inexperienced receivers, and another problem laden one that has never been dominant, as if it's shoe-in that they're going to become the next premier group of WRs in the league. I don't understand it. And when anyone suggests, for valid and identified reasons, that it's not likely to happen that way, they get slammed.

I think at the end of the season you'll have a different take. I'm just curious if it works out that way what your take on the FO and Whaley, not to mention Marrone, Manuel, and Watkins, etc. will be.

I hope you're right, I simply don't see any reason for the team to come together. I've posted many reasons why hoping on Watkins to be worth what we gave up in the Draft is ridiculous, and how Spikes isn't going to make the kind of difference that we need.

The bottom line is that unless Manuel can become a consistent QB that hits Watkins and his other receivers in stride on a regular basis, the basis for the hope that you cite is unfounded. Unfortunately Manuel hasn't been that QB either at FSU or here. For people to suggest that all of a sudden he's going to become that is baseless.

Watkins I view very much in the same way that I viewed Spiller when we drafted him. Both come from the same program and played under the same coach. It's a system, offensively anyway, that relies heavily on mismatches in talent by Clemson's skill position players and defenders. Both Watkins and Spiller only performed above average against inferior competition. I've laid the facts and basis out for that a number of times.

Unfortunately those mismatches don't exist, or definitely not at the level that they did at Clemson, which is exactly why Spiller hasn't done here what many were hoping and what he did at Clemson. Everything I read, study, or analyze tells me the exact same thing about Watkins. Bubble screens won't work in the NFL and he made a name on them at Clemson, they were his biggest plays. Also, Manuel sucks at the short stuff an screens and the like, whereas that was where Watkins bread was buttered.

One of the more relevant negatives on Watkins is his route running, so now we have a QB that isn't accurate on deep balls and a rookie WR that's got route running issues. Yet, absolutely no one here sees any pending issues. OK I guess Manuel's just going to blindly loft up the football and like neighborhood ball Watkins is going to go shag them.

I've said it numerous times and I'll say it again and stand by it insofar as is possible, this group of WRs with its youth and inexperience is going to struggle this season with a QB that will no longer have any fan support by week 10. If that's a recipe for playoffs, then I don't know what to say. To me it's a recipe for being 5-11.

I'll bookmark this thread and we'll come back to it later on this season.

Do you understand that nobody is reading your 500 paragraph posts? Soooooo, it's basically pointless posting......

[Fletch]

Awww. How cute.

You seem to actually think I give a **** about your opinion.

I'm sorry, I mistook you for someone that wanted to discuss football intelligently.

Go see if the front office has any openings, they've made a habit out of hiring 70-some year-old GMs. Great idea Joel.

[Fletch]

Do you understand that nobody is reading your 500 paragraph posts? Soooooo, it's basically pointless posting......

I'm pretty sure that the people that I'm responding to are. Personally I'd prefer it if you would just skip over them. Apparently you're emotional wherewithal won't allow you to do that without making crude comments while doing so.

Funny, so many of you want to get off of the topic of football and make posts about other posters.

[trapezeus]

super bowl hosting talk is insanity. cleaning up a handful of areas that were supposed to be cleaned up in the 70's does not get us on par with superbowl cities.

it's not the cold. it's the infrastructure. and the hard sell of buffalo in february.

10 years isnt' going to get it done.

[Dr. Who]

No problem. Thanks for the civil discourse relatively speaking.

I still don't see where logic or rational thinking was interjected though and this response also didn't explain it. Just sayin' since you brought it up.



It seems that this is a critical point of contention.

The "current situation" is Manuel not making an enormous leap this year away from the mentioned disaster.

I have no idea what's optimistic about a front office that more or less has been in place for eons, and even with Whaley, since 2010 and with only minor tweaks otherwise. Whaley's been Asst. GM and top-dog re: personnel since 2010. I know that no one wants to tag him with any of our massive and glaring failures since then because he wasn't GM, but the fact is that he was the highest level person in charge of personnel, that's exactly what he was hired for. So holding him responsible, ultimately, for our drafts and free agency periods for five seasons running including this one is certainly reasonable.

Either way, he chose Manuel last year and reached for him despite other wisdom all over the place. This year he traded away next year's 1st for Watkins. I'd have taken Evans, IMO he'll have both a better rookie season and better NFL career. The front office otherwise has already proven itself incompetent. It has nothing to do with the money since they've spent it, foolishly, on players that don't deserve it. There should be no argument there and you won't find too many people to agree with you there with perhaps the singular exception of Whaley, but I'm not sure that most fans think that Whaley's done much but collect a paycheck over the last five years when clearly what I said above has been the case.

I can't disagree with you more on the way that the team is shaping up.

Jackson's gone after the season and who knows to what extent he'll be useful this season.

Dareus isn't likely to come back now.

Who knows what Spiller's status is, but he's no F/T RB anyway, which we need now.

It's only on a team with a success starved fan base like ours that players like Dixon, Brown, Corey Williams, and Rivers are welcomed as if they're anything but warm bodies.

Everyone else is overreacting and overemphasizing a group of young and inexperienced receivers, and another problem laden one that has never been dominant, as if it's shoe-in that they're going to become the next premier group of WRs in the league. I don't understand it. And when anyone suggests, for valid and identified reasons, that it's not likely to happen that way, they get slammed.

I think at the end of the season you'll have a different take. I'm just curious if it works out that way what your take on the FO and Whaley, not to mention Marrone, Manuel, and Watkins, etc. will be.

I hope you're right, I simply don't see any reason for the team to come together. I've posted many reasons why hoping on Watkins to be worth what we gave up in the Draft is ridiculous, and how Spikes isn't going to make the kind of difference that we need.

The bottom line is that unless Manuel can become a consistent QB that hits Watkins and his other receivers in stride on a regular basis, the basis for the hope that you cite is unfounded. Unfortunately Manuel hasn't been that QB either at FSU or here. For people to suggest that all of a sudden he's going to become that is baseless.

Watkins I view very much in the same way that I viewed Spiller when we drafted him. Both come from the same program and played under the same coach. It's a system, offensively anyway, that relies heavily on mismatches in talent by Clemson's skill position players and defenders. Both Watkins and Spiller only performed above average against inferior competition. I've laid the facts and basis out for that a number of times.

Unfortunately those mismatches don't exist, or definitely not at the level that they did at Clemson, which is exactly why Spiller hasn't done here what many were hoping and what he did at Clemson. Everything I read, study, or analyze tells me the exact same thing about Watkins. Bubble screens won't work in the NFL and he made a name on them at Clemson, they were his biggest plays. Also, Manuel sucks at the short stuff an screens and the like, whereas that was where Watkins bread was buttered.

One of the more relevant negatives on Watkins is his route running, so now we have a QB that isn't accurate on deep balls and a rookie WR that's got route running issues. Yet, absolutely no one here sees any pending issues. OK I guess Manuel's just going to blindly loft up the football and like neighborhood ball Watkins is going to go shag them.

I've said it numerous times and I'll say it again and stand by it insofar as is possible, this group of WRs with its youth and inexperience is going to struggle this season with a QB that will no longer have any fan support by week 10. If that's a recipe for playoffs, then I don't know what to say. To me it's a recipe for being 5-11.

I'll bookmark this thread and we'll come back to it later on this season.

Well, if you've decided that Whaley is part of the problem, think he reached on Watkins, that both Spiller and Watkins benefited from a college system that doesn't transfer to the NFL, and that Manuel is not going to improve, then naturally, you will be pessimistic. My surmise is the team has more talent and more potential to play well than you suppose. You may be right, in which case I will be disappointed and one will probably see a new GM and coach along with a new owner.

[better days]

And you have to read them why now?

Nobody is doing anything more than skimming your short stories.

But it takes forever to scroll past them they are so long.

[Fletch]

Well, if you've decided that Whaley is part of the problem, think he reached on Watkins, that both Spiller and Watkins benefited from a college system that doesn't transfer to the NFL, and that Manuel is not going to improve, then naturally, you will be pessimistic. My surmise is the team has more talent and more potential to play well than you suppose. You may be right, in which case I will be disappointed and one will probably see a new GM and coach along with a new owner.

What do you think Who? Think that was a good assessment?

What's your prognosis along those lines at the present time now?

[Edward Robinson]

What do you think Who? Think that was a good assessment?

What's your prognosis along those lines at the present time now?

You have to be 1 of the biggest if not the biggest trolls not only on this site or any other BILLS fourm site out there bro. Trust me I go on the big ones on the regular. ( buffalorange.com, twobillsdrive.com billszone.com ect. Once the BILLS are offical been eliminated from playoff contention which personally think wont happen until the last day of season if at all it is fine to give your opinion however to be quoting other people post and speaking like you have been proven right 6 games into the season when the bills are at .500 and is only 1 game back from the top of the division lead is in my opinion lame as it gets.

[Mr. Pink]

The Superbowl will never be played in Buffalo.

Not enough hotel space, nowhere near the proper infrastructure, not with the type of weather that can come that time of year.

It would be a disaster.

[trapezeus]

The Superbowl will never be played in Buffalo.

Not enough hotel space, nowhere near the proper infrastructure, not with the type of weather that can come that time of year.

It would be a disaster.

I wouldn't say "Never" but a 10 year time frame is way too tight. unless restaurants and life sprouted around the stadium immediately and buffalo got 1 or 2 stand alone interesting spaces to host the numerous side events the NFL throws, we just don't have the capability at the level the NFL wants.

someone said jax and sochi had cruise ships brought in. unless there are huge cruiseships already in the great lakes, i don't think we can expect any coming to the area.

maybe something more interesting that buffalo could pitch is hosting the always faltering probowl game. and maybe with a number of tweaks and side events, it can grow into its own thing. on a smaller scale it would be good for buffalo's exposure but not overbear the limited resources of a superbowl

[Edward Robinson]

The Superbowl will never be played in Buffalo.

Not enough hotel space, nowhere near the proper infrastructure, not with the type of weather that can come that time of year.

It would be a disaster.

Not enough hotel space. Have you looked around? They are putting hotel space everywhere around WNY. If you include Rochester and Canada there is more than enough space to host a superbowl. If our new stadium is a dome stadium downtown then that will all that would be needed to host. If Minn can host a Superbowl than buffalo is more than able to do it.

[Mr. Pink]

Not enough hotel space. Have you looked around? They are putting hotel space everywhere around WNY. If you include Rochester and Canada there is more than enough space to host a superbowl. If our new stadium is a dome stadium downtown then that will all that would be needed to host. If Minn can host a Superbowl than buffalo is more than able to do it.

Yes, people will want to stay an hour away from where the game is and travel in bad weather to the stadium. Or travel across the Peace Bridge where on a good day it's a half hour wait to get across.

Not gonna happen.

[WagonCircler]

I don't give a damn about having a Super Bowl in Buffalo.

I just want a Super Bowl parade in Buffalo.

[trapezeus]

Not enough hotel space. Have you looked around? They are putting hotel space everywhere around WNY. If you include Rochester and Canada there is more than enough space to host a superbowl. If our new stadium is a dome stadium downtown then that will all that would be needed to host. If Minn can host a Superbowl than buffalo is more than able to do it.

have you been to minny? it's a more vibrant city and larger. it may not be NYc, but they have high end hotels, they have a lot of restaurants walking distance. and it doesn't rely on its urban sprawl to provide these things.

while the major cities lump anything not chicago, ny, boston or la together, there is a big difference between different middle market names.

Minny also has a ton of corporate activity with larger white collar jobs. rightfully or wronglfully, it pushes the basic idea of corporate sponsorship which is so dear to the NFL.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Not enough hotel space. Have you looked around? They are putting hotel space everywhere around WNY. If you include Rochester and Canada there is more than enough space to host a superbowl. If our new stadium is a dome stadium downtown then that will all that would be needed to host. If Minn can host a Superbowl than buffalo is more than able to do it.

Minneapolis and it's surroundings are more than 3X the size of the Buffalo area, and as noted it has many large corporate HQs, including major NFL advertisers like Best Buy and Target.

[Edward Robinson]

What does the size of the area (land) wise have to do with hotel space. Minnenapolis is the 16th ranked Metropolitan area in the united states at 3,459,146 The Buffalo/Niagara/Rochester area is ranked would be ranked 27th in the country at 2,217,433. In most major cities are 45min-1Hour drive is not far at all. I used to live in Atlanta. So again as I stated there is no reason why The Buffalo/Niagara/Rochester could not host a SuperBowl. As far as the peacebridge thing thats a non issue if especially if they can get the peacebridge expansion finally moving along.

What does corporate sponsors have to do with host a superbowl. If you host it Businesses and people will come. Point Blank!

[Fletch]

You have to be 1 of the biggest if not the biggest trolls not only on this site or any other BILLS fourm site out there bro. Trust me I go on the big ones on the regular. ( buffalorange.com, twobillsdrive.com billszone.com ect. Once the BILLS are offical been eliminated from playoff contention which personally think wont happen until the last day of season if at all it is fine to give your opinion however to be quoting other people post and speaking like you have been proven right 6 games into the season when the bills are at .500 and is only 1 game back from the top of the division lead is in my opinion lame as it gets.

And you'd have to be pretty ignorant of reality to be defending what he put out.

I didn't say a ****ing thing about myself being right, was just challenging frequently repeated statements from earlier in the season that clearly aren't correct yet were shoved down our throats as if anyone not accepting them was just what you said, a troll.

If you ask me, seems like the trolls are the ones that keep trying to shove bull**** down the throats of everyone and then when some aren't gullible, or stupied (pick your poison), enough to believe it, they are called names, slandered, labeled as trolls. etc.

So get a grip tough guy!

[trapezeus]

What does the size of the area (land) wise have to do with hotel space. Minnenapolis is the 16th ranked Metropolitan area in the united states at 3,459,146 The Buffalo/Niagara/Rochester area is ranked would be ranked 27th in the country at 2,217,433. In most major cities are 45min-1Hour drive is not far at all. I used to live in Atlanta. So again as I stated there is no reason why The Buffalo/Niagara/Rochester could not host a SuperBowl. As far as the peacebridge thing thats a non issue if especially if they can get the peacebridge expansion finally moving along.

What does corporate sponsors have to do with host a superbowl. If you host it Businesses and people will come. Point Blank!

if you look at the superbowls that are perceived as successes for the NFL, they like a strong corporate base so that corporations buy the tickets in bulk and use it to wine and dine high end clients. those corporations pay more for the tickets. in return, those corporations want to be at home base, or they want to be able to get people to a great warm weather local. Jax got ripped for it's low end accomodations, sprawl.

Ed Robinson, you are speaking as a fan who would enjoy going to the game. you would not mind a 1 hour commute. but high end, big money people do not want that. buffalo does not have the 5 star hotels in close radius to restaurants/ shopping/ and other activities. we are building, i get that and it's a good thing, but its not to scale of a larger city.

There are too many areas that still just look run down. it doesn't have a serious light rail program to alleviate heavy traffic. it does not have the private airport or large enough public airport to support HNW people and the average folk. it's not to say we can't get those things, but those things don't get done in 10 years all at once. especially in buffalo. We've talked about the peace bridge for 36 years.

[BidsJr]

What does the size of the area (land) wise have to do with hotel space. Minnenapolis is the 16th ranked Metropolitan area in the united states at 3,459,146 The Buffalo/Niagara/Rochester area is ranked would be ranked 27th in the country at 2,217,433. In most major cities are 45min-1Hour drive is not far at all. I used to live in Atlanta. So again as I stated there is no reason why The Buffalo/Niagara/Rochester could not host a SuperBowl. As far as the peacebridge thing thats a non issue if especially if they can get the peacebridge expansion finally moving along.

What does corporate sponsors have to do with host a superbowl. If you host it Businesses and people will come. Point Blank!

Comparing the Buffalo region to Minneapolis by population is insanity. I live in Minneapolis and was born in Buffalo.

Minneapolis has MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR corporations that are not only still in business, but have been the last 50-100 years. That means generational wealth that has been here for a very very long time. The population density of very high paid workers is much much higher than in the Buffalo region and that is why it is silly to compare by population.

[Edward Robinson]

While I respect all of your viewpoints this city can be quite different 10 years from now than it is now. Just look at the change in the last 18 months. I dont see what the problem would be for superbowl people driving to Toronto or Niagara Falls Canada and also checking out our Resigned downtown. I mean buffalo is not NYC, but it is not Montgomery AL either.

[trapezeus]

i just think it's really hard to reform a city in 10 years to be in line with a superbowl town. unless the stadium is so cutting edge and part of a complex so large that it draws the superbowl out of its uniqueness, it's unlikely.

the more i think about it and the way pegula has operated with the sabres, it is about making football open to buffalo for other activities. get the draft here. get the probowl. put on a good show for those involved and make it staple for the league. take something that other cities haven't clamored for and make it the best its been in years and use a community excited to put on a good show when the bar is low.

you even read with downtown stadiums that the city would have to undergo 4 new bridges and a lot of road work. and that's just to handle the load of 60k to a regular game. you get a world event, it could be crazy. and if its too sprawled out, non-locals will ***** and moan about it.

if we can't do it at the highest of levels, then we should not do it, because it will leave yet another ugly mark on our reputation.

[Edward Robinson]

i just think it's really hard to reform a city in 10 years to be in line with a superbowl town. unless the stadium is so cutting edge and part of a complex so large that it draws the superbowl out of its uniqueness, it's unlikely.

the more i think about it and the way pegula has operated with the sabres, it is about making football open to buffalo for other activities. get the draft here. get the probowl. put on a good show for those involved and make it staple for the league. take something that other cities haven't clamored for and make it the best its been in years and use a community excited to put on a good show when the bar is low.

you even read with downtown stadiums that the city would have to undergo 4 new bridges and a lot of road work. and that's just to handle the load of 60k to a regular game. you get a world event, it could be crazy. and if its too sprawled out, non-locals will ***** and moan about it.

if we can't do it at the highest of levels, then we should not do it, because it will leave yet another ugly mark on our reputation.

good points sir

[BidsJr]

While I respect all of your viewpoints this city can be quite different 10 years from now than it is now. Just look at the change in the last 18 months. I dont see what the problem would be for superbowl people driving to Toronto or Niagara Falls Canada and also checking out our Resigned downtown. I mean buffalo is not NYC, but it is not Montgomery AL either.

Yes it can be very different in 10 years, I agree. But it cannot be Minneapolis in 10 years, that was my point.

Believe me I was shocked when I got here and saw the cost of living and mansion after mansion in this town. The answer for Buffalo is 100 years down the road and not 10. At least in regards to the Minneapolis comparisons.

[Mr. Pink]

While I respect all of your viewpoints this city can be quite different 10 years from now than it is now. Just look at the change in the last 18 months. I dont see what the problem would be for superbowl people driving to Toronto or Niagara Falls Canada and also checking out our Resigned downtown. I mean buffalo is not NYC, but it is not Montgomery AL either.

I don't think the city is any different today than it was 10 years ago. In fact, in some aspects it's worse.

I don't get how all of these people think things are getting better here. Buffalo is a city perpetually stuck in 1982 right after the steel industry all disappeared.

[Fletch]

Did I just post that.

I guess so.

I forget which handle I'm using all the time of the 8 I have.