...

I was happy to see Parker-Jones was teh victim of the hip check. He was the most annoying Hab out there.

Benson is going to be a star.

Bolded: That's the timeline as I read it. As noted, the complaint was investigated. Are we to assume the investigation is still open after three years? As for the rest, yes, bored sociopath is totally it.

How many ways can this dichotomy be cast? A persona of whom it is socially safe to hold prejudices against vs someone desperate to regain a job in an industry that poorly handles charged social issues? If it was already investigated and determined to be a non-starter before the suit was filed why use it as an argument in the suit?

You are not even addressing the interaction with me. It doesn't matter what your position is over the course of the thread, your characterization of people suggesting he look into defamation as a response strategy being "emotional" and then claiming I misinterpreted a response to someone who wasn't even in the conversation at the time are balderdash. The effect is to apply the law.

Waiting for the system to work is just as slow! And without any proactive measure to challenge the accusation one allows themselves to be seen as "hiding something" or "not able to respond". We've seen that in this thread alone. In the early stages we don't concern ourselves with outcomes, we concern ourselves with actions. A suit can be settled or dropped later on once it has achieved its real goal of challenging and negating the accusation.

Baloney. @Cascade Youth hadn't even contributed to the thread before your post above that I referenced in my reply to you. Therefore I could not possibly have misinterpreted a response by you to they. I was responding directly to your "advice" to Pegula that it's "not worth it..." to try and address this through litigation - a path which does exist. If the goal would be to repair Pegula's reputation, then the threat of, or an actual suit, are the quickest, most effective tactics to employ from a PR perspective. With so much on the line, one should not rely on others' activities to do the job. There are other ways to do it, but with such an emotionally charged matter it should be dealt with quickly, hence the reason I think your "advice" is riffraff. If it turns out that Pegula was falsely attributed yet someone allowed it to spread, personally I am all for making an example of that kind of garbage "reporting".

Of course it does. You seem to be implying the bias is out of line.

So condescending. The comment I'm responding to has little to do with the legal machinations and everything to do with PR. If Pegula is in a position to take this to court he should not let it slide no matter how long it takes to play out. We all understand how damaging a situation like this can be; witness this very thread where before any facts, evidence, or proper context have been established, people are not only saying this is bad for Pegula, and he shoudn't own the team, but already posters are judging other posters with the "showing your true colors" accusation. The only effective counter to this situation from a PR perspective, again, assuming Pegula has been done dirty, is to take a suit all the way. Letting it slide is effectively as bad as the accusation itself.

Uhm, if the attribution or representation of the comment is false or inaccurate and readily provable in a courtroom you bet your tushy he should take that to court. If you believe otherwise you have no idea how fast ideas and statements are spread through the public consciousness and how damaging something like this can be to a person's reputation. He sues, or threatens to sue and if the person who posted immediately doesn't retract and issue a public apology using an equally effective dissemination campaign then he proceeds fully with the suit. Assuming, of course, he didn't say it.

Wow, that was horrific.

If we're going to talk about this topic, this is perhaps the most important point to talk about. After hearing Vanek, Peters, Rivet and Connolly talk about what Ruff was like during that time, you'd have to think Ruff has the edge in strategy especially since we haven't seen Meatballs really get tested in that department. However, I think Meatballs has the respect of the team much more than Ruff and communicates with them far better. I recognize there is a percentage on this board who dismiss 'the intangibles" but no matter how you slice up the hockey world (and leadership generally), qualities like "character," "compassion," "respect," and "positivity" among many others are heavily weighted. Ruff, in that period, by all accounts ranked low in the intangibles. https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nhl/top-five-candidates-for-the-2023-24-jack-adams-award/ar-AA1gvNu3 https://www.usahockeymagazine.com/article/2009-10/what-makes-great-coach https://hockeytraining.com/great-coach/ https://www.hockeyskillstraining.com/how-character-helps-you-advance-in-hockey/

Wait a second. *****. ***** is really censored! Rhymes with "long" but starts with a "d".

With Quinn out, the pressure is definitely on Peterka to generate numbers. He needs to demonstrate that he doesn't need Quinn to be productive; to create his own identity rather than being reliant on Quinn and Cozens. His history suggests that he is up to the task.

I listen to After the Whistle all the time when I work out. I think it's perhaps the best hockey podcast out there because you're getting real players and coaches talking candidly about the game and they have a Sabres bias. The Tim Connolly episodes were awesome, especially when Vanek joined them. They put into context a lot of what was going on during the 2006-2011 period.

That Terry; just a few days ago becomes president of the team and already up to his old tricks.

But he doesn't have a lot more on his plate. They got rid of it all. None of the Kim projects were panning out - including the Sabres. She bit off more than she could chew - which I think she was criticized for here by some when it began. It's too bad it took her being stricken for them to finally admit defeat and change course.

PSE was Kim's project. Kim can't proceed with PSE. + Whomever in the family was slated to take over PSE and, therefore, both sport properties and other activities, isn't prepared to/eager/ready/willing to take on such a huge responsibility. + Terry is getting old and is likely trying to reduce his work load. + Of course this sets up both sport properties to be sold or have ownership stakes sold. = What do you expect?

They definitely used to have one. They hardly used it when I was buying mini-packs circa 2017. Trying to recall if they used it last season but I went to only one game.

Who sees Kane delivering a powerful, inspiring locker room speech during the second intermission of a game that could put the Sabres into the playoffs but they're down three points?

Vanek is on frequently with Rivet and Peters for their After the Whistle podcast. I'm pretty sure they questioned him about coaching during one of those podcasts from this summer. I don't remember what he said, just telling ya in case you're interested enough to go find it.

By now the Sabres' Analytics team has likely run models of every player combination with variations on circumstances. They know exactly who they want to keep and jettison. They are also making suggestions on who to play with whom in what situations at least for the first 10-20 games.