Audacy producing "Training Camp Live"; Buffalo Bills are persona non grata

[tbolt909]

For the record, A, the City of Buffalo has nothing to do with Bills stadium negotiation. That would change if the Bills were considering a downtown site. But from what we know, the Pegulas are proposing the new stadium for suburban Orchard Park, adjacent to the existing one. The primary level of government during the past two stadium lease negotiations (in 1998 and 2012) was New York State. That appears to be the case this time. Erie County government does play a role as the official owner of the stadium. County Executive Mark Poloncarz wrote a book about the last stadium negotiation, which I should read to be able to address this issue. Still, I don’t recall there ever being a public vote in past negotiations. The state and team came to an agreement. The Erie County Legislature gave its approval, and construction began.

When you say construction, do you mean renovations? The current stadium dates back to 1973. Atlanta has gone through the Georgia Dome and now another newer dome since then.

It appears the current lease expires in 2023.
Buffalo will need to expedite building a new stadium. Roger Goodell made it pretty clear that the Bills won't be staying in Buffalo without a new facility. A dome would be logical so it could used for other events...

 

[tbolt909]

The NFL just released the rankings for the most valuable teams. Dallas and New England are #1 and #2. NY Giants are #3 and NY Jets #8.

Cincinnati and Buffalo are at the bottom at #31 and #32. The Bills are last and play in a small market with an old stadium. That's not good for long term viability. The NFL will be watching closely for real plans on a new stadium...

 

[Rusty Bridges]

The NFL is not a gate-driven league, such as the NHL. With a mega-billion TV contract, the NFL, although a major-market-centric league, can continue to cater to a few select small market franchises such as Green Bay, New Orleans and Buffalo.

The stadium and market analysis published in Sunday's Buffalo News is unsettling, but the facts within the story are and have been long known to Buffalo sports fans. Bills Stadium Deal (may be behind paywall)

The issue is and always will be team base revenue and market size, especially as market size relates to national advertisers. As it relates to team base revenue, the Bills having the lowest ticket price in the NFL, visiting teams walk away with a lower split when they play the Bills in Orchard Park. That figure is slightly offset because the Bills' stadium holds 71 thousand bodies, while most stadia in the league are in the 60 thousand+ range. So, yes, a lower base ticket price, but at least five thousand more bodies in the stadium than other cities. The Bills consistently sell out and have a large base of season ticket holders.

Another component that adversely impacts the Bills is the shortage of corporate patrons, especially as compared to larger markets such as Dallas, LA and NYC. Not a lot of Fortune 500 companies in Western New York, companies that buy the big luxury boxes and suites. But according to published analysis, luxury box revenue does not get shared with visiting teams, so that issue is technically irrelevant as to other owners.

Buffalo's biggest asset is the fact that it's a regional team which draws fans from Rochester, Erie, and to some extent, Syracuse. Add those TV markets and the market size gets much larger. Add Toronto (yes, it's outside the league's present TV-advertsising market configuration) and the market size swells.

Bills fans are extremely loyal and rabid, even through losing seasons. It may be premature, but the long term signing of the team's franchise quarterback to a new contract announced last week, may in a small way contribute to the team staying put and a new stadium being built. Bills and Josh Allen Agree to New Long Term Deal (may be behind paywall) To be settled, the issue of how much public and private funding goes into building the facility.

Another issue, that being the long term viability of the NFL as a fans-in-stadium product. With a number of different platforms on which to present its product, the league clearly understands the shifting dynamics of how its product is consumed. Stadia may, in the future, be things of the past as fans pay subscription fees to watch their favorite (home) team on their big screens. A stretch? Yes, at least at this writing.


An unsettling issue is player injuries, especially CTE, and player longevity, which will contribute to the viability of the sport as fans know it. The NFL gives lip service to playuer safety and CTE, despite knowing that football takes a tremendous toll on players' bodies and brains. An interesting social sciences study was published a few years ago in which it was posited that (1) professional football may become a sport entirely given to players of color as a result of white kids' parents guiding them to soccer, swimming, basketball, volleyball and baseball; and (2) professional football may be eclipsed by other sports, particularly the NBA and world league soccer.

Professional sports, much like radio and TV, is ever-changing and evolving.

 

[tbolt909]

The NFL is not a gate-driven league, such as the NHL. With a mega-billion TV contract, the NFL, although a major-market-centric league, can continue to cater to a few select small market franchises such as Green Bay, New Orleans and Buffalo.

The stadium and market analysis published in Sunday's Buffalo News is unsettling, but the facts within the story are and have been long known to Buffalo sports fans. Bills Stadium Deal (may be behind paywall)

The issue is and always will be team base revenue and market size, especially as market size relates to national advertisers. As it relates to team base revenue, the Bills having the lowest ticket price in the NFL, visiting teams walk away with a lower split when they play the Bills in Orchard Park. That figure is slightly offset because the Bills' stadium holds 71 thousand bodies, while most stadia in the league are in the 60 thousand+ range. So, yes, a lower base ticket price, but at least five thousand more bodies in the stadium than other cities. The Bills consistently sell out and have a large base of season ticket holders.

Another component that adversely impacts the Bills is the shortage of corporate patrons, especially as compared to larger markets such as Dallas, LA and NYC. Not a lot of Fortune 500 companies in Western New York, companies that buy the big luxury boxes and suites. But according to published analysis, luxury box revenue does not get shared with visiting teams, so that issue is technically irrelevant as to other owners.

Another issue, that being the long term viability of the NFL as a fans-in-stadium product. With a number of different platforms on which to present its product, the league clearly understands the shifting dynamics of how its product is consumed. Stadia may, in the future, be things of the past as fans pay subscription fees to watch their favorite (home) team on their big screens. A stretch? Yes, at least at this writing.

When the NFL had the "TV blackout" rule, many Bills home games were not televised because they didn't sell out. In the past 20 years, the stadium was often half empty for late season games. The Bills were bad to mediocre during that long playoff drought. No one can blame people for staying away when the product is bad. The NFL players are highly paid pros, not high school kids.

The average Joe in the stands is not where the revenue comes from anymore. Corporate sponsorships, luxury boxes, TV, merchandising, etc... are the priority. The Oakland Raiders had "rabid" fans and they now play in Las Vegas. The attitude of fans toward a team carries little weight in monetary decisions...

 

[SirRoxalot]

When the NFL had the "TV blackout" rule, many Bills home games were not televised because they didn't sell out. In the past 20 years, the stadium was often half empty for late season games. The Bills were bad to mediocre during that long playoff drought. No one can blame people for staying away when the product is bad. The NFL players are highly paid pros, not high school kids.

The average Joe in the stands is not where the revenue comes from anymore. Corporate sponsorships, luxury boxes, TV, merchandising, etc... are the priority. The Oakland Raiders had "rabid" fans and they now play in Las Vegas. The attitude of fans toward a team carries little weight in monetary decisions...

You really need to look at facts before you post. For example, regarding attendance, :

Buffalo Bills average attendance 2025| Statista

In 2025, the Buffalo Bills recorded an average home attendance of 70,878 spectators.

www.statista.com

The fact that the Bills stadium was bigger than most meant that a few games didn't sell-out during the blackout period, but average attendance was still over 90%.

As far as the "corporate sponsorship" is concerned, did you read this from Rusty's quote?

Another component that adversely impacts the Bills is the shortage of corporate patrons, especially as compared to larger markets such as Dallas, LA and NYC. Not a lot of Fortune 500 companies in Western New York, companies that buy the big luxury boxes and suites. But according to published analysis, luxury box revenue does not get shared with visiting teams, so that issue is technically irrelevant as to other owners.

NFL players are aware of what the game does to their bodies. That's why they command the kind of money that they get. The hope is that they'll change not only their lives, but the lives of their families for generations. And, most love the game. Unless fans abandon the game in droves the NFL will continue on in one form or another for a long time - at least long enough to pay off a new stadium. The Pegulas aren't looking to move. They're looking to keep the league satisfied and the current stadium can't do that.

 

[tbolt909]

The fact that the Bills stadium was bigger than most meant that a few games didn't sell-out during the blackout period, but average attendance was still over 90%.

As far as the "corporate sponsorship" is concerned, did you read this from Rusty's quote?



NFL players are aware of what the game does to their bodies. That's why they command the kind of money that they get. The hope is that they'll change not only their lives, but the lives of their families for generations. And, most love the game. Unless fans abandon the game in droves the NFL will continue on in one form or another for a long time - at least long enough to pay off a new stadium. The Pegulas aren't looking to move. They're looking to keep the league satisfied and the current stadium can't do that.

The "Corporate Sponsorship" piece is a big reason why the Bills are #32 on the Forbes list. The NFL wants more revenue, not less.

I didn't clarify that "tickets sold" can differ from actual attendance. Some people buy tickets but then don't show up for a game. None of that matters that much. The NFL can easily persuade the Pegulas to move (or sell) if that's what they ultimately want...

 

[Rusty Bridges]

I didn't clarify that "tickets sold" can differ from actual attendance. Some people buy tickets but then don't show up for a game. None of that matters that much. The NFL can easily persuade the Pegulas to move (or sell) if that's what they ultimately want...

Still "Tickets Sold" = revenue. And the Bills, once having an 80 thousand seat stadium, often filled in the Kell-Thomas-Smith era. The stadium now seats 70 thousand, and the fact is, it's filled more often than not. The Bills and NFL don't "comp" many tickets these days. Yes, the NFL as a league entiuty can exert influence on teams, but endorsing a move leaves a serious stain on the league, which is why it now imposes a hefty penalty on teams that up and leave. Two other elements that concern the NFL: Long time senator, Chuck Schumer (as of this writing, the senate majority leader) and Congress as a whole. Even the NFL, as monolithic as it may be, doesn't want to get in those cross hairs.

 

[SirRoxalot]

The "Corporate Sponsorship" piece is a big reason why the Bills are #32 on the Forbes list. The NFL wants more revenue, not less.

I didn't clarify that "tickets sold" can differ from actual attendance. Some people buy tickets but then don't show up for a game. None of that matters that much. The NFL can easily persuade the Pegulas to move (or sell) if that's what they ultimately want...

The NFL doesn't get squat from "Corporate Sponsorship." The Pegulas do. Could they move? Yes. Do they want to move? No. They have a massive investment in WNY, from the Bills and Sabres to training facilities, the Harbor Center, and other properties. Everything they've done indicates that they're here to stay as long as they can get the support they need to keep the leagues happy.

 

[tbolt909]

The NFL doesn't get squat from "Corporate Sponsorship." The Pegulas do. Could they move? Yes. Do they want to move? No. They have a massive investment in WNY, from the Bills and Sabres to training facilities, the Harbor Center, and other properties. Everything they've done indicates that they're here to stay as long as they can get the support they need to keep the leagues happy.

You're out of touch with the modern NFL. The league gets a hell of a lot from Corporate Sponsorships. The Pegulas may want to keep the Bills in Buffalo, but the league will have the final say. The Raiders, Rams, Chargers have all moved in recent years. The Bills will need a stadium deal that all parties think is viable going forward.

The NFL currently has 32 teams and the Bills rank last in value. Pegula is not as naive as you seem to be. He's in it to make a buck. Hockey insiders say he has gutted operating expenses for the Sabres recently...

 

[TheBigA]

The Pegulas may want to keep the Bills in Buffalo, but the league will have the final say.

The league is run by the owners, not the other way around.

 

[Rusty Bridges]

The Pegulas may want to keep the Bills in Buffalo, but the league will have the final say.

The implication that "the league" will move the Bills, is absolutely incorrect. The NFL has a policy in place that thwarts the capricious movement of franchises and penalizes teams that move. The Raiders paid a ton of money, albeit to the league, to move to Las Vegas. Yes, the league puts pressure on teams and communities to provide "suitable facilities," which is to say the NFL wants the biggest, bestest, mostest and latest. But as far as mandating that a team move, no. In fact, according to a few attorneys who practice and specialize in sports, business and anti-trust litigation, such a mandate by the NFL would bring to the fore a slew of anti-trust litigation that the league doesn't want or need. Books would be reviewed, depositions would be taken and the process would get quite nasty. What's more, the league would be required to reveal things it prefers to keep confidential. Yeah, it's a syndicate, no question.

The owner of the Chargers, Dean Spanos and family, bailed on San Diego after the voters turned down a referendum for a new stadium. The Spanos family is quite a wreck, with a lot of hand-wringing about how much the Chargers are bleeding the family trust. Poor dears. The NFL didn't mandate Spanos leave San Diego.

Similar situation in St. Louis, with the owner, Stan Kroenke, looking at LA, market #2, without an NFL team. The NFL wanted a team in LA on NFL terms, but Kroenke (who also owns the Denver Nuggets) did a power play on the league and moved the team.

Just speculatin' but it wouldn't surprise this poster if, in about ten years, Los Angeles has but one NFL team... which means it will have at least three prof football teams. Fans of college football will get that reference.

 

[tbolt909]

The implication that "the league" will move the Bills, is absolutely incorrect. The NFL has a policy in place that thwarts the capricious movement of franchises and penalizes teams that move. The Raiders paid a ton of money, albeit to the league, to move to Las Vegas. Yes, the league puts pressure on teams and communities to provide "suitable facilities," which is to say the NFL wants the biggest, bestest, mostest and latest. But as far as mandating that a team move, no. In fact, according to a few attorneys who practice and specialize in sports, business and anti-trust litigation, such a mandate by the NFL would bring to the fore a slew of anti-trust litigation that the league doesn't want or need. Books would be reviewed, depositions would be taken and the process would get quite nasty. What's more, the league would be required to reveal things it prefers to keep confidential. Yeah, it's a syndicate, no question.

What policy? It's written in sand. The clock is ticking on Buffalo to build a stadium. The "pressure" you mentioned is real. The late Ralph Wilson was one of only two owners who voted against the Browns moving to Baltimore in the 90s. The league and ownership are essentially the same now.

The league is not mandating that the Bills move. Relocation is inevitable without a new stadium...

 

[TheBigA]

The league is not mandating that the Bills move. Relocation is inevitable without a new stadium...

Ever been to Lambeau Field? You think the NFL wants a new stadium there?

 

[tbolt909]

Ever been to Lambeau Field? You think the NFL wants a new stadium there?

Yes, been there. Different situation than Buffalo. Green Bay is one of the legacy franchises. Roger Goodell made it clear he expects a new stadium in Buffalo...

 

[SirRoxalot]

Yes, been there. Different situation than Buffalo. Green Bay is one of the legacy franchises. Roger Goodell made it clear he expects a new stadium in Buffalo...

Well, you got one part right. The Bills will need a new stadium. The owners (who run the league) have told Terry & Kim Pegula as much. As far as Corporate Sponsorships are concerned, they're a revenue stream for the teams, not the league. There is some truth that you need revenue above and beyond the shared TV money for coaches, staff, and facilities. The Pegulas have invested in all that. It would not be fiscally prudent for them to build a new stadium themselves. Since the team and the facility influence a revenue for a host of other entities, governmental units, and tax bases, it would be smart for the county and the state to make the investment in a stadium. The Pegulas will pick up part of the tab, but certainly not all of it - or even the majority.

 

[DN14224]

The Pegulas will pick up part of the tab, but certainly not all of it - or even the majority.

And the portion of the $1.4B(!) cost remains to be negotiated:

Bills owners committed to sharing costs on proposed stadium

BUFFALO, N.Y. (AP) — Buffalo Bills owners Terry and Kim Pegula are committed to paying a portion of the projected $1.4 billion in their proposal to build a stadium. “When it comes to the future new…

www.wivb.com

 

[Y2kTheNewOldies]

https://news.****************/artic...s-Multi-Year-Extensions-With-Bills-and-Sabres

AUdacy extends the Bills and Sabre's broadcast contracts.

 

[DN14224]

If that extension goes to '27 they might be broadcasting from the new stadium...

Bills fans react to details of stadium proposal

Some Bills fans who attended the team’s open practice in Orchard Park Wednesday are wary of some details emerging regarding the team’s proposal for a new stadium.

www.wivb.com

 

[Buddy Shula]

It's all a very interesting discussion, and it will all be discussed in front of the public during city council meetings. If the city decides to offer bonds, it will be brought to a public vote, and the voters will decide if they want to support such an idea. Same if demolition is involved. The city can't commit public funds without input from the public. If Buddy Shula objects, he should plan on attending the meetings. As a prominent businessman, he could even volunteer to be part of a local committee.

You bring up a great point Big A. I really should get more involved in the process if I have concerns. For whatever reason, I don’t.

I am just against taxpayers having to fund a billionaire who employees millionaires, but I am all for investing. If taxpayers fund the majority of the project, they should set aside x amount of profit, and give tax credits for that amount to taxpayers.

This is essentially extortion by the Pegulas. I realize that the Bills bring in a lot of business to the area for 5 months. But they also hurt businesses. Every retail store I can think of may as well shut down on Sundays when the Bills are playing. Events, Charity Events, Restaurants with the exception of pizza joints, all retail, is virtually shut down, for home or away games.

I get it. Buffalo loves sports and especially their teams, but there are downsides as well. We pay enough freaking taxes in this state. For every employee I hire, it costs me 25 percent more because of payroll tax. Property tax is sickening . I pay less than $800 a year for my house in Key West! Plus, they have no sales tax.

I have rental properties in Lancaster that I pay $9000 each for. In freaking Lancaster! Plus renters who don’t have to pay a dime thanks to the government and the ridiculous moratorium on kicking out renters.

I’m sorry, but when I do upgrades to my stations, I pay for it out of my pocket. Nobody helps. Yes, I can write off the depreciation, but the dollars still come out of cash flow and decrease margins.

I love football on Sundays. I look forward to watching. I’m a football fan, thus the name Shula. But funding something I get no monetary return on bugs me. Almost as much as Nielsen 😇

 

[TheBigA]

I am just against taxpayers having to fund a billionaire who employees millionaires, but I am all for investing. If taxpayers fund the majority of the project, they should set aside x amount of profit, and give tax credits for that amount to taxpayers.

Profit from what? You seem to believe the investment is in the team, and that's not where the investment is being made. The investment is in the stadium. Of course the state or county will reap the benefits from the stadium, whatever they happen to be. Parking fees, concession fees, naming rights, other uses for the stadium. But the main benefit to taxpayers is from the continued presence of the Buffalo Bills in the area, the fans the team attracts, the money they spend in the area, and that sort of thing.

It is what is called a public-private partnership. That's also what the American system of broadcasting is considered. You own the facilities and the government owns the spectrum. They regulate what you do with your facility. The stadium will be a similar arrangement.