LTS

My comment was about how you were directly attacking another poster. The personal insults were what I didn't want. Presidents have been pushing the boundaries of their office since it was formed. There's no doubt about that. A dictator isn't a bad thing be definition. It can be a good thing. But, generally speaking it's been a bad thing in the history of the world. I'm not sure we're 1930's Germany, but we are seeing actions taken that do question where the train is heading and 1930's Germany could be one of those stops. Contribute as much as you want, but let's not attack poster's themselves. (Also, as I said, it wasn't just you. I just used your post as an example.) I don't know about that. There are plenty of people who have ideas about what matters in America and they clearly lots of them don't agree. I think people have been largely influenced into modes of thinking that are becoming more and more binary. We're less open to discussions and mixed bags of ideology and more prone to us vs them mentality. It's dangerous, but then I think that's just what the two major parties want.

Completing 3 months at my new job today. What a great job. There's all kinds of frustrations with the legacy crap they need to shed but they are committed to doing it. Very few days do I end the day not excited about what I am doing. I'm somewhat angry at myself for hanging onto the old job with a hope that I would survive and end up promoted. It's turned out great that they booted me (over the other leader) and that I ended up where I am. So.. yeah. Now, off to Vegas again, Sun-Thu. The same days I went in October when my last company chose to dump me while I was still there for a conference. Different conference this time... I'm not worried. 🙂

I am using this post as an example. Let's keep the information to the topics at hand. Let's not get into passive aggressive or overtly aggressive stances towards posters. I would have pulled in a counter example but in the middle of reading this thread I had to get back to work so I lost where I was. I did not want to wade back through it. The topic has moved but generally is are there similarities to the action of the Trump administration to those of early Nazi era within Germany.

I don't read this as the Sabres not doing much in the off-season (not that Adams provides any reason to believe otherwise). Bryson at $900k is harmless. He's not the worst defender on the team so it's good to have him around. I believe there will be changes in the off-season. I mean, there's no harm in believing it. It's not like it makes me any more likely to spend energy or money on this team until something changes. I'd rather believe they will do something than not. If I get to that point I won't be here even.

The tool used by the ignorant. Therefore, the tool used by politicians and those who love them. Sigh.

Just remember... Pegula was in the room when he said it. Even if the solution begins with him selling the team, he's part of the solution.

I understand where you are coming from. But I'm only in this country because I was born here. I don't necessarily believe it's the best place to live, for me. I often find myself at odds with the US "way of life". Now granted, the idea might be that people should be able to choose their own way of life, but that brings me to a phrase in your response. I don't know what the "Idea of America" is specifically, and it probably varies from person to person, but I don't think we've ever seen it in this country. I think people believe there was a time when it existed but I'm not so sure. I'd say when the US was formed was the best chance, but equality has yet to exist in this country for those who are its citizens. It allowed ownership of people as property straightaway and then 2/3's of a person, etc. Look at the arguments in our threads today and its clear that people are still not equal in the eyes of the government. The divide between in our socio-economics is fueling our ever increasing partisan politics. The strength of a middle class strengthens the centrist view, but we're not heading in that direction. The strength of education fuels a successful society, but we're not heading in that direction. I think there's a concept of "America" that people hold to and in some ways they believe it's either lost or achievable, but I'm not sold on the idea. The United States is coming up it's 250th year of existence. It's a short time to determine its the "best way of life" versus just "a way of life". Anyway, I could probably go on and on but let's just say, I hope like hell we don't lower the already low bar of when we put the lives of people on the line just to support corporate American greed. I respect anyone who is willing to put themselves first in the defense of an idea and their country, but their willingness to serve should be treated with the utmost respect and never abused as it has so many times in the past with the pretense of "Defending Democracy".

There is no difference. It's partisan politics and proof that both sides and any media the is complicit with it are the problem. As I will keep saying.

The 2 minute instigator penalty automatically carries a 10 minute misconduct penalty. It's non-negotiable. The only negotiable part is whether it's a game misconduct or not and it certainly did not warrant that. I don't like the 2 minute penalty at all. As for the headshot, Kulich put himself in a vulnerable position. I would be shocked if the NHL took any action. I thought it was clean at the time. It's unfortunate, but it's a contact sport.

Gotta give McLeod credit for getting his stick on Petro's and causing the puck to not go as high, etc. Perhaps they thought it would help him accept responsibility and be more engaged. All the wrong reasons sure, but it's a possibility. Don't ever do this. Jack is not absolved of any responsibility in his situation. He became a very different person after a year or two with the team.

It would certainly be my last moments as a US resident and ultimately a citizen.

Hopefully Dahlin doesn't flip flop. But perhaps the comments attributed to Dahlin were before trade deadline? Certainly having big emotion guys like Zucker and Greenway choose to re-up goes a long way to cementing that people want to be there. I think we all could see that Cozens had checked out. He played, but not to his potential. He had been shopped and I am sure it got to him. Either way, I want to see more and until the team wins consistently... we'll have to take these moments and cling to them even if they are as fleeting as the half-life of a muon.

So, Karmanos is in Pittsburgh and the team is failing, the remote location is a problem. But before him the team was failing with people in Buffalo. So, maybe that logic doesn't quite work out? The question to ask is this, assuming Karmanos' skill set is a benefit to the Sabres, does allowing him to work from Pittsburgh really matter? Do you really believe that if he were in Buffalo all the time there would be a difference? I don't and not for a single moment. The other question to ask is, if they could not have Karmanos because he wouldn't relocate, what execs do you believe would choose to relocate to come to Buffalo? There's always talk about players don't want to be here, that Pegula is horrible, so if an exec is willing to relocate for the Sabres, are they any good? Bottom line we don't know, but we're burnt as fans and people want to latch onto this as it's some big reason why the team fails. I feel confident that all the discussion that occurred prior to last week on why the team continues to be horrible seriously has more impact than where Karmanos lives. Sure, they do. Part of my response was talking about corporate life not so much high-level sports management. That said, I still don't think it matters as much as people believe it does. I can collaborate with people across the world, in real time, any day. If the Sabres cannot figure out how to use a web conferencing application or a telephone the issue is not the location of the executives, it's the executives themselves. And agree, we clearly disagree on this. However we know that many organizations operate successfully with remote executives. We know that organizations with local executives also can operate horribly and I don't think the sample size of The Buffalo Sabres is enough to base an opinion on to declare where Karmanos lives as the problem, or even a problem. For all we know, he is a problem and would be regardless of where he is.

As mentioned earlier, the best play of the game would have been to give Hertl the first star. Nice ability to battle back. I thought the Sabres had some really good chances to take shots (legally) at Eichel after the hit on Kulich and didn't. I don't like that. Despite the play by Howden being clean in my opinion you have to play the rest of that game as though someone slapped your mother. But.. this is the Sabres. Lots to like, lots to still not like, but take the win. It's meaningless, but it's still a win.

What's the probability you realistically assign to that thought or are you going for extremism here? Hell no. Shut these people up and fast. The more they are allowed to go full lunatic with their hands on the wheel of the United States the greater chance they escalate to a point of no return and we, and the rest of the world, are stuck with the consequences. They are the kind of people who don't go down without taking everyone else down with them.

You are speaking from personal experience, as am I. The key is that I am not casting absolute statements about how the Sabres need to operate whereas you are. In your experience, you needed an onsite. It doesn't mean the Sabres need that. I also did not get a job because I would not relocate or even be willing to spend 3-4 days per week in their office locations. This was a company that came to me for the position even. I considered driving the six hours (the pay was VERY nice) but in the end said I wasn't interested. They had others on the executive team who did choose to do that. Ultimately, in my mind, if their mindset was that you can only be productive in an office setting then it demonstrated their lack of progressive thinking and focusing on the wrong factors in how to be successful. I wondered what other challenges I would face with their thinking based on that. I think it's valuable for teams to come together multiple times a year, but not constantly in the office or even forcing it 3-4 days a week. It also limits candidates for a position. Either you can get someone to relocate, which is quite disruptive to life, or you are stuck with candidates in your area that tend to exhibit a form of group think, especially at the higher levels.

"Hang the code. They're more like guidelines anyway." That said.. I am sure there's some existential threat to the US that would justify the President to take military action without the input from Congress. Then again.. Congress might approve, the damn boot lickers they are.

Indeed. I wonder how much it would cost for lettuce and many other items if we had to pay minimum wage workers to be in the field.

I've been working in highly functioning organizations with remote workers for years now. A person's ability to communicate and perform their job is not a function of where they are located. It's a function of themselves. I don't agree. The more I think about it the more I think someone heard Dahlin and Adams were meeting and Dahlin told him that losing is unacceptable and someone took out their jump to conclusions mat and decided it meant Dahlin was threatening to leave. That said, the inherent threat is there. Dahlin clarifying that he never used the word leave is enough proof of all of it. His remarks are spot on. The team sucks, he hates it. It needs to get better. But he has not threatened to leave. Working remotely is fine for a LOT of jobs. The guy who runs my entire organization is not located in a market where we do business. Most of the people in his leadership team are not. We've been highly successful. What is the advantage of being there, in market, day after day? And keep in mind, it doesn't mean he's never in Buffalo (all of a 3 hour drive away).

Cool. In the immortal words of Private Mahoney, "Thank you sir, I make everybody sick."

Probably crazy to celebrate someone who's making that much money.. because of course he could take even less.. but that's the position he's put himself into and we'd all take it if we could. So, kudos to him because if he's sincere, then I love it and if he's not? He's a great marketer. Either way.. just win.

Nothing personal, how old are you? I guarantee I'm older... perhaps I should not guarantee it. I would see it the way you see it. However, I bet money that my kids would see it as the "harmless lie to subvert corporate greed". The "go viral" to get brand attention. The company wants to leverage an "influencer" and thus a star is born. It's a very different world.

Nailed it.

No and I can elaborate more on what Dahlin said below. There's a lot about Jack Eichel and only part of it has anything to do with the Sabres itself. I'm not even going rehash any of it. He's not Dahlin, it's that simple. Eichel came to Buffalo a very good kid and somewhere along the way changed, personally. The rest is history. Again, F him. I don't care what he hated. He's not worth the time of day. I'd rather lose without him than win with him. That's exactly how much respect I have for him and, once again, it has nothing to do with his actual hockey play. The difference between where I work and a professional player under contract is that I can choose to leave. If I were a player who were, perhaps 3-4 years into my contract, and the team had not improved then perhaps I might get more vocal. But Dahlin is a player who re-upped his contract that started THIS YEAR for $11M. If he was that bent out of shape, he should not have signed an 8 year contract. That was HIS choice, he could have forced a shorter contract that would have had him end up a 27 year old UFA. He didn't. If he wants things to improve, showing up with sour ass grapes isn't going to make things get better. But, I don't see him doing that. So it's all speculation. This is what matters. Not what Bissonette says. He's 100% right and he's 100% echoing what we say. He's 100% sending a message to his team and his ownership. You can infer that at some point he'll have had enough of it and at that point who could blame him? He upped for 8 years and wants success. Simply by signing that contract he's saying he wants to make this team successful. After a few years, if it doesn't work out? Yeah.. then I can see him force the issue. I sure as hell won't be a fan of this team at that point.

I'd love if the topic came up just to see if he poked at it again. I'll watch tonight... why not.