Jump to content

PASabreFan

Members
  • Posts

    45,781
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by PASabreFan

  1. I guess I don't really care that he spends like a drunken sailor while raising ticket prices to maintain revenue sharing. For starters, tickets are probably still priced under the maximum the marker will bear, so we're getting a deal there even with regular increases. Secondly, I've spent my entire life with Buffalo sports ownership operating on a pure dollars and cents basis, and I could not be more sick of it. Pegula is already spending more on these teams than he should from a purely financial standpoint if he were running it strictly as a business. Can he technically afford to spend recklessly on sports without raising prices to qualify for revenue sharing? Sure. But he's already operating in an economically inefficient manner, and it's for our competitive benefit. If the cost of that is 4% annual ticket price increases, I guess I don't see the crime against humanity here--we're getting a heck of a deal, even if it's not a utopian deal.

    You don't have to raise ticket prices to qualify for revenue sharing, or even necessarily to "maintain" revenue sharing. That's been the crux of my fight on this topic. But anyone who's interested can take it to the revenue sharing thread (s).

    I didn't say the revenue sharing issue was BS. I didn't mention revenue sharing a-tall.

     

    I asked PAFan -- who has insinuated numerous times that since the Sabres were well under the cap this year, TP has gone cheap on them -- whether he still feels that way. He declined to answer. He also declined to answer whether he is on board with hiring Babcock.

     

    Both questions remain outstanding.

     

    As for GoDD's point: I can see the other owners being annoyed about the Sabres getting revenue sharing while opening up the vault for Babcock. However, in securing revenue sharing, the Sabres are just exercising their rights under the deal with the rest of the NHL. I would guess that plenty of other revenue sharing teams have spent big money on players here and there -- this is really no different from spending it on a coach in the context of whether the non-revenue-sharing owners are being taken advantage of.

     

    And the ticket price question has been done to death and is really neither here nor there in the context of Babcock's contract.

    No, they remain moronic.

  2. He turned down the first offer over the weekend. This one was enough to make him think again at least.

    If this is true, I just don't know... This was Dwight's point from earlier. If money is driving this decision, if he has to be offered an obscene amount that he "can't refuse," is this the right place for him?

  3. No. He will just hire somebody else.

    If Murray can't work out some arrangement with Babcock re: input on players, Murray won't be hiring anyone. He'll be fired.

    Right, which is what anyone reasonable should expect.  I'd liked how he compared this situation with Nolan's.  Murray wasn't going to trust or care what Nolan had to say...but he will with Babcock.

    If it's so reasonable — if it's standard operating procedure for GMs and coaches — why the need to negotiate? I think it's something a bit more than Babcock gets to give his input.

  4. Not quite sure where Kypreos is going here:

    So what does Babcock do with his new amazing long term #Sabres offer, accept? He wouldn't try and shop it back to #Redwings would he?

    I'm always intrigued by who these anonymous sources are and why they talk. What's your take on the source being someone close to Babcock — in other words, are negotiations going on informally through the media?

  5. Okay, what could Babcock legitimately want, knowing his experience as a "winning" NHL coach, with regards to player personnel that would be SUCH a big deal in negotiations? 

     

    Why wouldn't you WANT to trust your big name, Stanley Cup winning coach with some roster flexibility?  Murray isn't a power-hungry dingbat, right?  Did I miss catching on to that part of his personality somewhere?

    Imagine if Babcock walks away. Holy cow, Murray would be done in this town. If not with Pegula. GMTM, welcome to #ZFG. You are low man on this totem pole now, pal.

  6. What does this mean exactly?  Who is "in the know" and what is the content of these whispers?

     

    I would venture there aren't more than 3 or 4 people on earth who know, right now, what Mike Babcock is thinking, including Mike Babcock.

     

    Do you happen to know one of them?  That would be remarkable.

    Chz knows. She's proofreading his contract as we speak. Type. Whatever.

  7. Seriously. 

     

    Has there even been such a pairing of positions? What'd GM TM be, then, as a practical matter? Chief scout and an assistant GM?

     

    And if what you're saying is true, and we *don't* manage to grab the hot Babcock, then are the Sabres still cool with GM TM?

    He's going to Ottawa. Follow along.

×
×
  • Create New...