Jump to content

darksabre

Members
  • Posts

    43,144
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by darksabre

  1. 24 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

    I go to the stadium once or twice per year (except last year -- another wonderful aspect of 2020).  Certainly it's much smaller and less fancy than the new stadiums, and produces much less revenue, and the bathrooms are disgusting, but that's not the same thing as being structurally unsound.  My point upthread was that if there are in fact structural issues, I'd like to understand those a bit more.

    As far as that goes, my understanding is that the stadium being partially underground -- which I think is pretty unique among NFL stadiums -- substantially helps its structural integrity.

     

    "Current life-span has been exhausted" is not a reason -- it's just a repetition of "we need a new stadium" using different words.

    As for "high cost to maintain current stadium" -- this is what I would've liked more discussion of.  Why are structural reinforcements needed now?  Have any independent engineers agreed with this assertion?  How much would reinforcements cost and how long would they take, and how would this compare with the cost and time associated with a new stadium?  We didn't get any of that.

    Again, the thing to keep in mind here is when the stadium was built. If you look at other stadiums around the league that were built during the same era, nearly all have been demolished. Foxboro, Giants Stadium, Pontiac Silverdome, San Diego Stadium, Tampa Stadium, I could go on...

    It's a building code issue. The way we started building stuff, both commercially and residentially, changed in this country in the late 60s. Lower standards, lots of new materials, lightweight materials, etc. Stadiums built in the late 60s and 70s were not built to last.

    • Like (+1) 2
  2. 16 hours ago, nfreeman said:

    This was a good, long interview and well worth the listen IMHO for anyone interested in the topic.  I thought RR acquitted himself pretty well although there was certainly a fair amount of corporate spin.

    I thought Jeremy and Sal did an OK but not great job of questioning him.  They elicited a good amount of info that fans would be interested in, but shied away from tough questions.  For example, they didn’t press RR on why exactly a new stadium is “needed” when he asserted that it was and they didn’t ask for specifics when he asserted that every NFL team has gotten public funding for their stadiums.  

    I mean, I think anyone who has been to the stadium recently could tell you it needs to be replaced. It's almost 50 years old and it was built during an era where building code standards were trying to lighten things up a bit. It's not a brick shithouse like Lambeau. 

  3. 3 minutes ago, Thorny said:

    Sorry, the ones I already mentioned.

    Why? "He's used to things being easy". I can really start and end with that.

    This is an unbelievable statement to make in my mind. We have *no idea* how Jack's life has unfolded for him personally over the course of his 24 years on earth. Saying things have been "easy" for him is something I would not be surprised to see *anyone* take significant offense to. I'd wager to say he would find it to belittle the level of commitment a professional athlete of his level had display to get to where he is. 

    The last line - I've already laid out my argument for that. The list of NHL players who are adjudged to need "change of scenery" moves is expansive. I don't believe change of scenery players are Pricks. 

    I'd also say that Adams desire to move Jack is not in of itself proof or even solid support of anything - the last time they felt that way, they were wrong. 

    Good post Thorny.

    @dudacek I like you man, but ever since the press conference a while back you really seem to have developed an axe to grind over a bunch of supposed personality defects derived from very little actual information. Your version of John is very different from mine, even though we're both working off of the same raw materials.

    • Thanks (+1) 1
  4. 1 hour ago, mjd1001 said:

    So what does this mean for the Sabres arena?  

    Originally, the first story said funds were going to be linked for upgrades here with the new Bills stadium, I haven't heard much about that.

    Key Bank Center already needs some major upgrades now...I can't imagine how it is going to be in 5-7 years from now if it doesn't get major upgrades/repairs.

    What they really ought to do is just build a new arena. Everyone wants so badly for the football stadium to be some kind of downtown year round destination (it wouldn't be even if they put it there, but that's beside the point), so why not make a new arena the thing that accomplishes that goal?

    Build a new arena across the street where the HSBC lot is and then re-develop the land where the arena currently sits into something that is more attractive.

    Hell, the current arena site is where the new convention center should really go...

  5. 4 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

    No one in the locker room is going to give a crap that Eichel is on IR. They will be focused on other things than a player most of them haven't played with in almost a year. 

    He passes the physical and plays, he ups his value. There's no evidence Pegula has balked at retention but their is evidence that Adams would prefer not to retain things for 5 years which makes a lot of sense. 

    Lol wait out Adams? What's Brisson going to do, sit around for the next 5 years? Adams has all the cards and I love ppl trying to argue the opposite. If the opposite were true, Eichel would have been traded. Adams set the price and jack stays unless that price is met. Brisson can either get his client healthy or work his connections to get the Sabres their asking price. 

    I love how everyone seems to assume it is Brisson versus Adams instead of Brisson + Adams versus the league here. If they combine together they can then use their new leverage to get a fair offer and get Eichel traded. Makes more sense than Brisson fighting Adams. 

    I'm glad someone understands what is going on lol 

    • Like (+1) 1
  6. 1 minute ago, Thorny said:

    Well we did hear Minnesota was good with it. Evidently too few agreed to find a partner, though. 

    I still have serious doubts about whether he truly wants that procedure - but I could never prove that. 

    I'm pretty confident he would go through with it given the opportunity. If there's one thing John cares about it's playing NHL hockey. I really do believe he just wants to be on the ice ASAP and he was hoping everyone else wanted the same thing for him. Turns out that's probably not the case.

    • Like (+1) 1
  7. 4 minutes ago, Thorny said:

    If he really was bluffing on wanting that procedure, and it was merely a move to try and force a deal, he must have been confident in this fact. 

    Otherwise having his bluff called would be pretty interesting 

    I don't think it was a bluff. I think he saw his preferred procedure as a legitimate option. The problem is that it appears that not only do the Sabres not agree, but none of their possible trade partners agree either.

    • Like (+1) 3
  8. 11 minutes ago, Thorny said:

    Certainly seems like it. 

    I just wonder how likely he'd be to cave on a procedure he was truly dead-set on getting - even considering contract status. In his mind, it's HIS long term health. As many have speculated, from very early on: I wonder how much of it was a strategy in conception. Something like that might get revealed in that meeting, too. 

    But this is pure speculation 

    He never really had much of a choice on the procedure thing. The contract he has pretty much takes the power out of his hands, and that's probably what the league, the PA, and the Sabres told him. His only recourse, as has been discussed at length, would be some kind of arbitration, and the consensus is that he would probably lose that.

  9. 3 minutes ago, Thorny said:

    One thing to consider is that I don't think Jack would rob himself the chance of playing a feature role on Team USA at the Olympics. Not sure he'd be good with a pathway that takes him any longer than it needs to, if by chance a team advocates for something that's "extra cautious" so as to exploit the very cap loophole being discussed. 

    He might not have a choice if he wants to get out of Buffalo. Giving up the Olympics may be a sacrifice he needs to make if he really truly wants out.

  10. 8 minutes ago, dudacek said:

    Is there a twisted world where Jack’s surgery actually helps facilitate a trade?

    Im speaking to a team like Vegas who can put Jack in IR and circumvent the cap a la Tampa and Kucherov.

     

    If I were a team trying to trade for John, I would want him to get the surgery with the longer recovery time for precisely this reason. And I would want him to wait as long as possible to get the surgery so that he would be all but guaranteed to return just in time for the playoffs.

    It's distinctly possible that this is what Adams was banking on happening and why he's been very resistant to moving John quickly. I bet a lot of teams wouldn't mind getting Eichel in their system for zero cap hit this season...

    • Like (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...