JohnC

The biggest fault that can be attributed to Pegula isn't providing enough financial support for the franchise as it is hiring bad staff. If you hire a bad GM who hands out bad contracts, that is a money loser from an investment on the dollar calculation. If you hire a coach when there were better options for the position, regardless how much you pay for your selection, you are not only not getting a return on your investment in salary, but you are also not getting the results on the ice resulting in less fan support causing additional revenue loss. The bottom line is that management ineptitude costs you more money. It's stupid and a consistent theme during Pegula's tenure. When one is stubborn you don't learn from your mistakes.

The problem isn't lacking the urgency as much as it is having the ability to translate that urgency into production. I assume you watched the Carolina game and many others. This team, especially after being subjected to a number of injuries, simply isn't good enough to maintain the puck in their zone, even with a man advantage. Compare how other teams handle the puck without sloppily losing it as the Sabres often do? Even if one doesn't have much knowledge in the sport (count me in that unschooled group), it was evident to the untrained eye that Carolin was the better team. The problem with the Sabres is that it is an assembly of parts that don't properly fit together. The parts value is greater than the team value. This is where we are at and have been for quite a while. When you have the same people at the helm steering the ship it shouldn't be a surprise that they become stuck on the course they have unwisely set. There is a bland sameness to this Peugla franchise that is dispiriting.

Terry P. Would make significantly more money with or without a write off if he had a serious team. The fan support and revenue generation would be much higher. The obvious fact based on his record is that his own ineptitude has cost him money.

No owner in the NHL would have hired a GM such as KA. He clearly lacked the qualifications for the position. And to compound the problem with the inexplicable hire, no owner other than TP would have kept on the job for so long a person with KA’s record. This franchise has handcuffed itself.

The problem and the solution does’t originate with the HC. It’s starts with the GM who presides over the hockey operation. You can have an excellent coach while the GM has presented him with an imbalanced roster. Even with the best coaching the flaws are going to manifest itself. The Sabres have a third-rate owner who has assembled a third-rate organization. We’re stuck with a stubborn owner who doesn’t recognize his own limitations. Until a credible hockey person is installed at the top of the hockey operation, this franchise will continue to flail.

There’s no magical solution to what ails this failed franchise. No top tier coach is coming here until the organization is properly structured and staffed. As it is currently structured, it is set up to fail regardless who is the coach. There needs to be a major organizational renovation. Do you believe our stubborn owner is receptive to such a dramatic change? Right now, I don’t believe so.

Yes to question #1. No to question#2. Yes to question #3.

I watched a little more than two periods. You don’t have to have much hockey knowledge to recognize which team was out- classing the other team throughout the game, regardless what the score was. The Sabres have an unserious owner presiding over a third- rate franchise. It’s sad and maddening.

The bathroom? Some flushing needs to be going on to an expel the crap, starting with the howdy doody GM. In any business, institution or sports franchise at any level when there is systemic failure outside analysts are brought in to do a thorough review and then recommend a change of course. The problem here is that the Sabres are owned by a stubborn and obtuse owner whose strategy during his tenure is to double down on the same failed course. It’s beyond beyond being stupid!

The overwhelming majority of posters want the Sabres to do well. So a few posters with fringe views don’t come close to representing the majority opinion. Using them as a basis of argument isn’t a strong argument to make. It becomes a diversion from facing the real issues.

When you watch him play do you find him to be a consistent performer or are there games where he is noticeably off?

Is Levi ready to move up to the big league, or would it be better for him to stay in place and get more experience? I appreciate you and @inkman's Rochester reports.

A house. An hour. Hard H gets “a”. A soft H gets “an”.

The weather has little to do with some of our prime players wanting out. Players don’t want to be stuck in a dysfunctional franchise and every year watching other teams playing in the playoffs. The life span of a pro athlete is relatively short and they don’t want it to waste away. As far as your claim that many Sabre fans are rooting for the opposition, it is a silly and nonsensical response considering the wretched record during the Pegula era. What you perceive as disloyalty is the frustration associated with this inept franchise. You are blaming the victim when your criticism should be directed at the perpetrator.

I did some checking and “a” should be used because of the hard pronunciation “h” in the word housing.

What’s a housing letter?

Why do you think that players are more inclined to say "no thanks" here than with other franchises.

As you noted, this was a fraudulent "coaching search" that fooled no one. Everyone who had a penny's worth of sense recognized that the hiring process was an undisguised charade. It was lame to even try to call it as anything other than for what it was i.e. an owner's hire. The disqualifying issue isn't that Ruff was selected as the HC. It was that a critical hire, like the GM hire, was made based on the whim of an incompetent and hubristic owner. It isn't a surprise that when an organization acts in a third-rate manner that the end product is third-rate. Ownership matters!

KA was an owner's hire. From a qualification standpoint, it made no sense. From the owner's perspective, he got exactly what he wanted. He hired someone in his organization (business side) who had numerous discussions with on how to cut costs and save him money. A plan was drawn up to start over again, replacing the more expensive core players with cheaper newly drafted players. It was the standard model for most rebuilds. The argument shouldn't be about whether the "rebuild plan" was right or wrong because that was the approach that was decided on. Even if it was the wrong approach to take, that doesn't mean that it couldn't have worked reasonably well by year five if implemented properly. Anyone who has been in the work world knows very well that it doesn't matter what the "plan" is, whether it is a smart or foolish plan, that it will not work when carried out by incompetents. So where are we now five years into the KA tenure? We are still a flailing franchise that is spinning its wheels and getting nowhere fast. Within the Pegula ownership era it has been noted for its best players wanting out. And it shouldn't be surprising that its current best players will be on the verge of wanting out of this fiasco situation. What's the lesson to be learned? Ownership matters.

A lot of people made a premature judgment on Samuelsson. The same harsh judges were adamant about their evaluation of the defenseman. They were wrong because it is evident that the scorned player is now playing well. With respect to UPL, I, like many, are skeptical about him. What’s wrong with finding out what he is capable of? And don’t you think that if Ruff believed that Ellis gave the team a better chance to win that he would be in the net tonight?

Making a determination on UPL’s status with the team is a more important consideration than determining what Ellis’s role is, of course if it is believed that both goalies give you the same chance to succeed in tonight’s game. If Ellis ends on waivers and picked up, then so be it. It shouldn’t be forgotten that Levi is still in the system and can be moved up when the need arises.

The player wasn't close to the organization. He wanted out. And he wasn't here very long. As I said in the prior post, I just think that it gets overused to the point where it loses its intended effect. I just don't think in this particular case that it was warranted.

Why does he deserve a "tribute video"? He wasn't here long and wanted out. Besides, I'm sure he didn't want one or even care about having it. The tribute video is a nice tradition that gets used too much. There are a number of things that one can criticize the organization for, but this isn't one of them.

I’m not anointing Utah as a top team. I didn’t sat that they were. However, based on what I watched night, it’s not unfair that this young team is a rising team. With respect to being disappointed or not at getting a point in a game where you were decisively outplayed (my opinion), I’ll gladly accept the point. If we would have outplayed them or even played them evenly, I would be disappointed at getting just one point for the home game.

Your eyes are different from mine. In this game, I decisively felt that Utah was the better team. We hung in there but on balance the team that played better won. If you came away with a different conclusion, that's fine. The highlighted commented you made is exactly what I saw in last night's game.