Jump to content

SABRES 0311

Members
  • Posts

    4,588
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by SABRES 0311

  1. 3 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

    Ask me once we start the pre season.  For now I say: 

    • We have one good goalie until proven otherwise.   
    • Quinn should be back, and  that helps. 
    • Thompson should be healthy and ready to get back on track as a goal scorer. 
    • Defense is almost there but lacking the big force that clears the front of the net and pounds opponents  
    • We must add 2 centers and 2 wingers

    Tuch - Tage - Skinner

    Quinn - Cozens - Peterka

    Benson - New 2C/3C - New Power Forward

    Greenway - New 4C - New Winger 

    Spare:  Krebs and TBD

    Flush:   VO, Girgs

    To AHL: Jost, Robinson

     

     

    If your team has TNT and Tuch on the first line, your team isn’t making the playoffs. Not saying they’re bad but neither is a first liner in their positions.

    • Like (+1) 2
  2. 2 minutes ago, SabresVet said:

    Botterill was fired because he refused to cut staff. Murray because he didn’t build a team aligned with his HC’s scheme. Regier because he had lots of money and still couldn’t get it done during TPegs’ early years. 

    Terry wouldn’t have to fire so many people if he could find better GMs.  That would necessitate he admit he doesn’t know his a** from a hole in the ground about the NHL.  Which would, of course, allow Buffalo to attract a qualified GM to get this team into the playoffs.  I don’t think Terry has a plan if Kevyn keeps failing.  Not many eager to have thay guy second-guesssing a GM or meddling in personnel. 

    I still don’t understand why we keep hiring unproven GMs and coaches. A team in this phase needs experience all around.

    • Like (+1) 1
    • Agree 2
    • Awesome! (+1) 1
  3. 6 hours ago, etiennep99 said:

    What I don't understand is how people who supposedly have eyes to read
    and ears to listen can continue to make mistakes that the (once) majority
    does not.

    Rob Ray will say, "I had went to the bar" or "the puck had came out to
    the point."  These should be: "I had gone to the bar" and "the puck
    had come out to the point".  It's called the "Past Perfect".

    I found these explanations online:

    --
    "There are four past tense forms in English:
    Past simple:     I worked
    Past continuous:     I was working
    Past perfect:     I had worked
    Past perfect continuous:     I had been working"
    (https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/grammar/english-grammar-reference/past-tense)

    ---

    and

    ---

    The following is a list of Irregular Verbs in English:

    Verb     Past Simple     Past Participle
    ==========================================
    arise     arose     arisen
    babysit     babysat     babysat
    be     was / were    been
    beat     beat     beaten
    become     became    become
    begin     began    begun
    [snip]...
    win     won     won
    withdraw     withdrew     withdrawn
    write     wrote     written
    ==========================================
     
    * HANG - Hang has two different meanings. The first is "to attach (or hang) something in a high position" (e.g. on the wall or on a hook). In this case we use the above verbs Hang-Hung-Hung.

    BUT when Hang means "to kill someone by putting a rope around someone's neck and leaving them in a high position without any support", we use different verbs: Hang-Hanged-hanged. This verb is typical of public executions in the past. (e.g. They hanged him in the main square.)

    ** LIE - Lie has two meanings. When it means "to put your body in a horizontal position" (normally on a bed) it uses the Lie-Lay-Lain verbs.

    BUT it is regular Lie-Lied-Lied when it has the other meaning of "not to say the truth".  [Etienne - for 4 thousand years Indo-Europeans have been able to properly distinguish between these two usages, but Americans in the last 40 years have seemingly lost this ability.]

    (https://www.grammar.cl/Past/Irregular_Verbs_List.htm)
    -----


    I'll mention another more common problem. The infinitive. This is the "to [verb]"
    form, such as "I want *to* eat lunch" or "I will try *to* ignore bad grammar".
    So many people say the illogical "I will try *and* do something"; this would
    imply that you can read the future because you are starting that you *will*
    in fact do something instead of just "trying" to do something.  

    Here's another problem to mention.  It's not "where you *at*?".  It is
    entirely sufficient, and always has been, to simply ask "where are you?".  
    In general, it is poor English to end a sentence with a proposition.  
    In this particular case, it is entirely unnecessary and only serves to
    distinguish the talker/writer as poorly grounded in English *fundamentals*.

    I could do this all day long.  

    It's not "an invite", it's "an invitation".
    It's not "he has high compete", it's "he has a high level of competition".

    Blah blah blah.

    Learn English, folks.  I did.

    Sorry but the best part of this post is you put a lot of effort into it just to get one single thumbs down from @Doohickie😆

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