LTS

Negative people getting mad for getting called out for being negative. I love it. That's how spirals work. They perpetuate because everyone is always pointing fingers at the other factors without owning their own part in it. Fans, media, players... all just tearing each other down.

You and me both. How long are you planning to be in Sweden?

The only point I would debate would be the last point... Is it really Housley's game plan that the players lose their position and fail to cover or is that on the players? The slow reaction time of the Sabres players to get to pucks and to cover opposition is not something I would attribute to a coach so much as the lack of talent or desire by the player.

Suicide is such a tough subject. Having been to that edge I have a special place for it. If you ever need to talk, reach out to me. As for my Friday complaint.. in the Thursday thread. I am traveling next week for work (to our HQ). Needed to be in Monday morning for a meeting, so doing the dreaded Sunday flight. So, okay, fly at 5pm and get in at 10pm and all is well. Somehow my 5pm flight got booked for 6am. I didn't check when the itinerary was first sent. So, now I get to get up really early Sunday morning, get to my location by 10:30am and spend Sunday there. All because I needed to be there for that Monday morning meeting... which was canceled yesterday. Sigh.

I need MODO's travel agency services. I'm going to check out Stockholm when I first get there and up to the game but I would love to "go North" as you put it and see the country. I don't love cities overall. I love nature.

McDavid is at least a shooting star for his team compared to what Eichel is for Buffalo. McDavid is second in the league in points, Eichel is 30th. McDavid should be frustrated. He and Draisaitl are in the top 5 in scoring in the league and his team 23rd overall. See above. I'm done comparing McDavid and Eichel. If Eichel were anywhere near as talented he'd be putting up better numbers. Eichel may have all-world skill but he lacks all-world desire. We've all seen it. If you are convinced that you can't move Eichel then you are handcuffing yourself on how to improve the Sabres. I'm not saying it's the right move, I'm just saying that it shouldn't be taken off the table. I've seen Eichel blow many D-zone coverages and since the C is the 3rd D. Yes, it is his fault in those instances. It's not only his fault however. The goaltending is not Eichel's fault, but if you maintain higher possession and play better D you lower the soft goal opportunities (I'm still in the fire Andrew Allen camp). Eichel was largely criticized for not hitting the net as well. The Sabres in general have some shooting issues. When Eichel turns the puck over or doesn't get back on the PP and they score shorthanded while Risto is on the ice, he contributes. He also contributes when he fails to cover the defensive zone. No, it's not solely his fault, but he has some influence on it. The system... the team they are building needs to learn the system. This is usually also taught at the AHL level to help season the players for the NHL. The Amerks seem fine. You don't necessarily change the system to fit the players, especially on a young, developing team. The Sabres are a young team and as such some players were going to play in the AHL and some in the NHL. Some of where those players play is brought about by the position they play and their potential role on the team. So, you have to compare that and then decide what is the pool of players that play a position and that role and then see which makes the NHL. You can point to Tage Thompson, Casey Mittlestadt as they are the poster children for this. Who on the Amerks should have been up? Nylander? Most people were writing him off in the AHL. Olofsson? We'll see how he can contribute, but I'm already seeing people putting him down for his size. CJ Smith? He's bottom 6 which the Sabres have plenty of in spades, he's needed in Rochester. You can suggest you go out and sign some UFA veteran talent to fill those roles. Of course, for the purpose of longer term planning you are going to want some players who will accept 1-2 yr deals max and not break the bank. How many top 6 forwards fit that bill? Basically, none. It's not Eichel's fault, no... it's not really anyone's fault. We can keep hanging onto this mirage that Evander Kane was going to sign here. We can keep hanging onto the mirage the Ryan O'Reilly is a savior (he's not, he's done fundamentally nothing for St. Louis, they had been performing about as even as they were last year before they traded away Stastny). I outlined the Blues improvements in another thread, not rehashing it. He may lead in points, but the team overall isn't really all that much better. For what it's worth, you talk about Eichel has not made a single trade, etc. He's widely given credit for helping end Bylsma. If he's the $10M, untradeable, poster child of the Sabres that people claim then if he doesn't like the coach, which one is going to be moved? There are lots of problems on the team, and it's reasonable to believe that Eichel may be one of them. Maybe it's time for people to say they've had enough. But let the people say that. He's not calling anything like it is. He's out there looking for click bait in a pathetic attempt to save what's left of his pathetic career for an even more pathetic news organization. Good old Brian Burke... what has he won lately? A tough hockey guy who would take one look at Eichel floating back to the bench or not back checking with the tenacity he should be and then do what? Approach the owner and say, he has to go? And if the owner says, "We can't do that because the fans would revolt" what do you do? I don't want anyone running the Sabres who doesn't support the Canes Storm Surge. Years later, people have come around on the fact that the Sabres probably should have taken 4 1st round picks for Vanek. But everyone says it didn't happen because the fans would revolt. The fans are almost always wrong, because the fans are almost always too emotionally attached to make good decisions.

What you fail to understand is that your insult is to compare men to women. The insult itself is that you are calling them women. Which wouldn't be insulting unless you are insinuating that women are inferior and as such the men are acting like inferior women in their ability to cover the slot. A perhaps better insult would be to compare the Leafs slot coverage to that of a 12U house hockey team.

The game is just the impetus to go. I've wanted to visit since watching your videos. I need to see Sweden. Hopefully you'll be up for hanging out and showcasing? Even if you don't swing the game (it is pricey) there's always everything else.

They have extensions for browsers that can do almost anything these days, including pasting Nicholas Cage faces everywhere. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/niccage/

Harrington is a buffoon. I read his article, it's really useless. Calling out the Pegulas for not being patient when they should, but now they should not. He contradicts himself. If Eichel quit on Bylsma and has quit on Housley then who should the Pegulas have been patient with? The coaches and GM who did not communicate or those who do? Either way, the common denominator is not the coach and GM, it's the player. Harrington is flat out trolling for views these days. I almost responded to one of his tweets yesterday but I withheld. He called out the people of Buffalo for supporting the losing organization that is the Sabres. I wanted to point out that those same losers also support his losing organization and keep him employed. Here's the quote I think is the most telling Perhaps the problem isn't the owner, GM, or coach. Perhaps it's a certain player.

Maybe they'll trade him before he asks.

And once again you are not answering ANYTHING I asked. You are saying the same things over and over again. Moreover, like I said in another thread. I don't care about your avatar. I will repeat, AGAIN, I am not offended by your decision to support whomever you like at a moment's notice. My questions were a bit more substantial than that and it would be great if you'd read them again. If they are unclear please let me know what I can clarify for you. If you want to ignore them and repeat yourself again addressing nothing then I'm going down the road that Weave has gone down. I will answer your question. "Does that mean anything to you? (regarding teams that are entertaining)" Yes. I watch entertaining hockey all the time. I am a fan of hockey, the sport. In any given game I generally have a team I would prefer to see win. For the context of that game, I am a fan of that team. Overall, I root for the Sabres. I prefer the Sabres to be the team that entertains me and unfortunately they have not been doing that for some time now.

The only complication to saying things is how people react to them. Those words are usually the kind of speaking points given at the end of the season. I can only imagine how people would react if he were to say that now. It might please you, but I could see others tearing him apart. Transfer? Very plausible. Who knows if it's a good thing.

You want an answer to something that has so many variables to it to consider that providing an answer may not be possible. What you ask is the question to so many things. When is the right time to make a change? That's followed by, a change to what/whom? The one certainty right now is that the Pegulas will continue to be owners of this franchise. If any fan doesn't trust the Pegulas to do the right things to make the Sabres successful it would be advised to perhaps find something else to spend time with. Simply because it's something that is not changing. Any fan can call for Botterill or Housley to be fired or for other changes because those have some reasonable probability of happening. The Pegulas selling the franchise, at this point, seems a near zero probability.

Quite possibly. I watched periods 1 and 3 last night. I regretted tuning in. I'll be out of town again starting Sunday so I will miss the rest of it. Unless I decide to stream it in my hotel room... which is unlikely.

And like business, some opt for long term success by eschewing short term goals and others look for short term success with an acceptance that it might lead to longer term instability or problems. When companies make short term decisions to placate shareholders it is usually at the expense of long term success. Things that last take time to build. They cost money to build. Time and money usually are enemies of short term revenue.

Plausible theory.. This forum has an overwhelming negative tone towards the Sabres right now and as of late any attempt to point out positives or to contradict the naysayers has been met with less than gracious responses. Perhaps no one wants to wade into this territory.

You are not answering my questions, at all. I didn't say that you said "everybody should be a Canes fan". I said I was not offended (you apparently missed that). But again, you have not answered my questions. I'm giving you a fair shot at things here.

I agree. I don't care about his avatar. I've addressed him in another thread on his purpose though.

Serious question. If you believe Terry Pegula is incompetent, how much value should you put in the words he uses? If you believe he used that word on purpose, does it mean you should give him more credit on his competency? I'm not questioning your take of his wording. It's an open question to those who believe he is incompetent or those who might side with you and indicate that he used that word on purpose. I'm not sure which side I fall on. The situations seem to contradict each other. I'm looking for what other people think.

Your last question does bring up one question as well. Why do you waste your time coming to the forum to converse with others who are wasting their time watching garbage? This is not a backhanded way of saying leave. It's a legitimate question. You are showing up, every day, to point out who you are rooting for and that the Sabres suck. I'm not offended, it's just annoying. Imagine if I broke my leg and I got to listen to you tell me, at work, at the grocery store, at the gas station, that "Wow, broken legs really suck. That must be a pain to deal with." How long do you think it's going to be before I tell you to STFU? You know the forum, you see the forum, you read the forum. I am giving you credit for recognizing that fans aren't enjoying this team. What response do you expect from people when you post what you post? Do you expect people to say, "Let's go be Caniacs for the year!" Do you expect people to say "I'm gonna root for former Sabre Bob Boughner!" My question was, why are you surprised people are responding as they do? I have my assumptions but I am asking questions because I want to know your answers to them. One last question, could you construe the willingness to jump ship to support a new team (your third) as being ultra-sensitive to the Sabres product? You've reached your limit of being able to tolerate the blight that is the Buffalo Sabres. Clearly others have not. Who's more sensitive to the Sabres? The answer is clearly you, since you've jumped ship. The only question is... are you ultra-sensitive?

I very much want to go to Alaska... but the kids keep choosing beach locations and so it remains that. ?

YES! This is going to be incredible.

Dude.. thanks for the warning. I was not prepared for that this early.

Bolded - if you can't play, it's incapacitating Italics - upon request only means he has to ask, if he doesn't it doesn't matter. Even then, they just say, he's sick and can't play and there's the rub. Overall, it's a lot of words with the only real metrics saying that the Sabres cannot use an emergency recall if they have a non-injured player called up that was a healthy scratch. So long as they can ice a team of 6 D and 12F and 2G. Every season there are a boatload of players who suffer the amazing 1 day flu and miss a game. It's so amazing for such a dangerous illness that the CDC should study the NHL in how to right the flu. ?