Losing Cheap is Profitable!!!

[Kenny]

I know there's been a few posts on this subject already, but this one from ESPN (hopefully not a repost) explains it perfectly... Makes me sick to be a Bills fan:

Cash flow is no problem for any of the teams with ample salary-cap space. The $125 million each NFL club will receive this season from the league's many national television contracts will cover player expenses, while ticket sales and local marketing cover overhead, and then some, even for small-market clubs. That leaves mucho grande greenbacks

Player expense might not equate to wins, of course. But there's something more basic happening. In the NFL structure, a cheap team that loses might have more profits than an expensive team that wins. Victory is nice, to be sure, but losing cheap can be remunerative...money that is not spent on players goes into the pockets of the owner and his relatives

Each NFL team gets exactly the same national TV payment whether it's winning big on "Monday Night Football" or losing badly and never aired nationally. Ticket sales can vary and generally are where the profit resides. But the revenue swing between packing the house and having a poor gate just isn't that great.

Buffalo, 11 consecutive years out of the playoffs, just traded one of its few established performers, Lee Evans, to the Ravens for a middling draft pick. Unloading Evans and replacing him with a minimum-salary young player cuts the Bills' costs by about $3 million this season, which is more than profits would rise if every seat were sold. Trading Evans makes a winning season less likely, but the odds of a profitable season go up -- and a built-in excuse is created. How long until a Buffalo team official says, "We knew we'd have an off year when we lost Lee Evans," as if he had been swept from the practice field by helicopter-borne commandos, rather than deliberately traded away.

For Buffalo, this is a recent pattern. Just before the 2009 season began, the Bills waived their starting left tackle, Langston Walker, and the team's highest-paid offensive player. Two games into the 2010 season, the Bills waived their starting quarterback, Trent Edwards, their second-highest-paid offensive player. Both actions increased profits while setting up an excuse for a losing season

While I dont necessarily agree with the Edwards reason (he was cut because he just plain sucks), the article pretty much sums up our situation.

http://espn.go.com/espn/page2/story/...ap-paying-wins

[paranoid]

Good post. I was never in the "Ralph is cheap" crowd because I thought it was too simplistic of an explanation for the decade-long debacle of mismanagement.

However, this article certainly raises some doubts about Wilson's methods and motivations.

[mrbojanglezs]

can terry pegula buy the bills already

[X-Era]

"Both actions increased profits while setting up an excuse for a losing season"

That comment cannot be overstated.

TO
Schobel
Lynch
Evans

All moves with no re-investment from both a monetary and talent standpoint. And no, I don't mean we needed to directly sign someone at the same position. But, when you lose talent, you have to add talent or your overall talent takes a hit.

[X-Era]

can terry pegula buy the bills already

I don't think he can by the NFL's rules. I don't think you can own two professional teams in the same city.

[BLeonard]

I don't think he can by the NFL's rules. I don't think you can own two professional teams in the same city.

Yes, Pegula could own the Bills and Sabres...

What a potential NFL owner CAN'T do is own another franchise in a competing NFL city... So, Mark Cuban, for example, owns the Dallas Mavericks... He couldn't buy the Bills.

It was an issue when Stan Kroenke was buying the Rams, because he owned the NBA Nuggets... I believe he turned the Nuggets over to his son, in order to become the Rams' owner.

Same city is fine, it's competing cities that causes a problem.

-Bill

[YardRat]

Walker and Edwards both sucked and deserved to be cut...any other interpretation of those two situations is just biased spin.

TO-signed 1yr, 6.5mil contract (not cheap) and wasn't re-signed (maybe cheap, but....) Good thing for Stevie he wasn't.

Schobel-dicked us around and didn't want to be here anyway.

Lynch-1 strike from suspension, and not even half the RB Freddie is. Spiller, to a certain extent, made him expendable.

Evans-Puzzling, yes, and not a good move IMO as I've maintained from the start but until somebody has verification that Evans didn't ask to be traded the possibility can't be discounted.

I have no problem supporting any of the above moves from a strictly 'football' perspective, except for Evans at this point, and that still remains to be seen.

The author has no credibility holding up examples like Walker and Edwards as profit-making moves and not football moves.

[YardRat]

And please don't bring the POS into the equation. Anybody that thinks he's worth 42mil is just plain dead-ass wrong.

[TacklingDummy]

If I ran a business that makes money without putting a good product on the field, I would cut costs if my team sucked too.

[mrbojanglezs]

Yes, Pegula could own the Bills and Sabres...

What a potential NFL owner CAN'T do is own another franchise in a competing NFL city... So, Mark Cuban, for example, owns the Dallas Mavericks... He couldn't buy the Bills.

It was an issue when Stan Kroenke was buying the Rams, because he owned the NBA Nuggets... I believe he turned the Nuggets over to his son, in order to become the Rams' owner.

Same city is fine, it's competing cities that causes a problem.

-Bill

what he said.... if they are in the same market its OK

[X-Era]

Walker and Edwards both sucked and deserved to be cut...any other interpretation of those two situations is just biased spin.

TO-signed 1yr, 6.5mil contract (not cheap) and wasn't re-signed (maybe cheap, but....) Good thing for Stevie he wasn't.

Schobel-dicked us around and didn't want to be here anyway.

Lynch-1 strike from suspension, and not even half the RB Freddie is. Spiller, to a certain extent, made him expendable.

Evans-Puzzling, yes, and not a good move IMO as I've maintained from the start but until somebody has verification that Evans didn't ask to be traded the possibility can't be discounted.

I have no problem supporting any of the above moves from a strictly 'football' perspective, except for Evans at this point, and that still remains to be seen.

The author has no credibility holding up examples like Walker and Edwards as profit-making moves and not football moves.

Your skipping my issue with it. No issue with the moves from a football perspective except for Evans.

In every case, salary was recouped and not re-invested. Furthermore, no significant player was signed with the new found money. The overall talent suffers when you do this. Again, I didn't need a direct replacement. When Schobel retired and we knew we had recouped his 5+ mill, did we re-spend that on some other need? No.

And one big part is that Ralph just fought for and won new revenue sharing... what's he doing with that new money?

[X-Era]

If I ran a business that makes money without putting a good product on the field, I would cut costs if my team sucked too.

Exactly. What's their motivation to spend? They are winning at making money.

[Billz_fan]

Face it folks, somewhere along the way Ralphie figured out (or someone did it for him) that the team could be just as profitable or more profitable losing. After decades in the biz he probably got tired of trying to compete for wins and decided to compete for dollars instead.

My guess is he/they then started to crunch numbers and play with all the scenarios and perfected the art of profit making and decided profit > Wins. He surrounds himself with people to help him make money instead of winning games.

If the team is making big bucks every season and all the employees are well paid who gives a rats ass if the team wins ? Answer = Just the fans and the fans are like lemmings running off the cliff every season to there death as they give there money to Ralphie All the while these fans are sure that this is the year we turn things around. IT will never happen while Ralphie has the team.

If the team wins great ! If the team loses Great. Either way The Ralphie is banking your money so his family is taken care of after he goes to the big IHOP in the sky.

[YardRat]

Your skipping my issue with it. No issue with the moves from a football perspective except for Evans.

In every case, salary was recouped and not re-invested. Furthermore, no significant player was signed with the new found money. The overall talent suffers when you do this. Again, I didn't need a direct replacement. When Schobel retired and we knew we had recouped his 5+ mill, did we re-spend that on some other need? No.

And one big part is that Ralph just fought for and won new revenue sharing... what's he doing with that new money?

Pretty tough to track probably and verify an answer that you will accept, but that's just crap.

Merriman, Edwards, Davis, Torbor, Florence, Smith, Barnett, Chandler, Thigpen et al aren't playing for free.

Against my own request, I'll bring up the POS.

For 42mil, would you rather have an average ILB OR an average ILB, a wildcat QB, AND a returning starter at CB. Cheap? Or smart football business?

[X-Era]

Face it folks, somewhere along the way Ralphie figured out (or someone did it for him) that the team could be just as profitable or more profitable losing. After decades in the biz he probably got tired of trying to compete for wins and decided to compete for dollars instead.

My guess is he/they then started to crunch numbers and play with all the scenarios and perfected the art of profit making and decided profit > Wins. He surrounds himself with people to help him make money instead of winning games.

If the team is making big bucks every season and all the employees are well paid who gives a rats ass if the team wins ? Answer = Just the fans and the fans are like lemmings running off the cliff every season to there death as they give there money to Ralphie All the while these fans are sure that this is the year we turn things around. IT will never happen while Ralphie has the team.

If the team wins great ! If the team loses Great. Either way The Ralphie is banking your money so his family is taken care of after he goes to the big IHOP in the sky.

So I think it's something a bit different.

I honestly think that they are not willing to go a year with little profits and stick there neck out to try to make a real playoff push. I think Donahoe was the last guy that got the leeway to do that and he failed. And when he put the franchise at risk and failed Ralph got pissed and said never again.

Then they convinced themselves in this current plan and that they could actually go to the playoffs with a reduced salary and plenty of profits.

Now, they are running this method and are willing to wait it out even though it isn't working.

I don't think they have balls like Pegula does to make a significant investment in the talent to try to change their fortunes and build excitement.

It's sad because if they were willing to sacrifice profits for a year and make a big investment in the overall talent, they may get right in the mix for the playoffs and see the money start to flow in.

[Billz_fan]

So I think it's something a bit different.

I honestly think that they are not willing to go a year with little profits and stick there neck out to try to make a real playoff push. I think Donahoe was the last guy that got the leeway to do that and he failed. And when he put the franchise at risk and failed Ralph got pissed and said never again.

Then they convinced themselves in this current plan and that they could actually go to the playoffs with a reduced salary and plenty of profits.

Now, they are running this method and are willing to wait it out even though it isn't working.

I don't think they have balls like Pegula does to make a significant investment in the talent to try to change their fortunes and build excitement.

It's sad because if they were willing to sacrifice profits for a year and make a big investment in the overall talent, they may get right in the mix for the playoffs and see the money start to flow in.

Funny thing is, whether your scenario is correct or mine is correct the end result is the same.

[X-Era]

Pretty tough to track probably and verify an answer that you will accept, but that's just crap.

Merriman, Edwards, Davis, Torbor, Florence, Smith, Barnett, Chandler, Thigpen et al aren't playing for free.

Against my own request, I'll bring up the POS.

For 42mil, would you rather have an average ILB OR an average ILB, a wildcat QB, AND a returning starter at CB. Cheap? Or smart football business?

No it isn't crap. TO's 6.5 mill was not spent on a new player for 6.5 mill per. Did we water down our overall talent by spending it one 3 never has beens? Possible.

26+ mill in cap room and a perpetual losing record to show for it is never smart when your trying to supposedly win.

[X-Era]

Funny thing is, whether your scenario is correct or mine is correct the end result is the same.

Yes, unfortunately it is.