JohnC
-
Posts
6,007 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by JohnC
-
-
9 hours ago, SwampD said:
There should be more grids. A lot more.
8 hours ago, SwampD said:Texas being isolated is the exact reason why it is own grid. I think the people that got those enormous bills should have had to pay them. Screw'em. That was the deal they signed. Just because they lost the bet, doesn't mean they should get out of paying it.
What choice does the customer have regarding the inflated bills due to an outdated system? They signed the agreement because there was no other choice.
As @Doohickie pointed out, the problem isn't that Texas has their own grid system so much as they don't have an ability to draw from another system when theirs is down. Another reason why there is a refusal to join a national system is that they don't want to pay for a system that has higher quality standards. Sometimes when you try to save a penny you end up paying a $$$. The people who end up paying the piper are the customers who had no other choice.
-
16 minutes ago, Doohickie said:
Because Texas as a state has an inflated view of itself. The grid did hold up this time, in no small part to wind power. 😉
I think it was a couple of years ago when the grid was badly damaged that it resulted in people getting utility bills in the $ 1000s. Texas may be the only state or one of the few states that are tied into the national grid. That makes no sense to me.
-
11 minutes ago, Hank said:
My uneducated opinion on Thompson's struggles this year is this is a very likely contributing factor. I had two kids by 25 and it was very challenging. The challenges can be compounded if his wife is also going through something that requires him to take on a larger role in the home.
Respectfully, because I hold you in high regard, I disagree. I did not read his post as an accusation. I read it as more like he was thinking out loud, wondered if it was a possibility, explained why he had the thought, and introduced it for discussion. Personally I think the idea is batshit crazy, and I'm sure you agree with that, but I have no issue with the way he presented it. As always, YMMV.
There are certain categories of behavior that even by insinuating certain things associated with one's reputation you are behaving inappropriately. My point is by insinuating when there is no trace of supporting evidence you are acting irresponsibly.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Doohickie said:
How fast do you think he was going? Looks like about 10-15 mph on icy roads and oh, by the way, there's a slight downhill. To me it looks like he might have come in slow (much slower than what was seen in the video), started sliding downhill, turned left to get the front end off the slick street and into the yard to try to get traction.
As someone who lives in Texas, a lot of the time they simply don't salt or sand the streets here. They're just not equipped to do that. I would think St Louis would be better about that being further north, if an emergency happens during an ice event, what are ya gonna do?
Could you explain to me why Texas refuses to be part of the national grid so when nature causes breakage in the grid there is no ability to bring in power from the other parts of the grid until the lines are restored? The people who are affected end up paying humongous bills until the lines are repaired because there is a supply/demand cost system.
-
9 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:
One of the beat reporters from TBN stated that the Bills were unaware that the Chiefs had 10 players on the field when they called it in from the sideline.
I'm just stating that's what the announcers stated. On the other hand, even if it was called by our HC who was not aware of the 10 men on the field, it wasn't an unreasonable call under the circumstances. (My opinion) Our coach took a calculated gamble. It didn't work. But in the end it was not a factor in the outcome.
22 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:He took the Eagles to the Super Bowl
we can't even get to the conference finals any more
I'm fairly confident the Bills would be the #1 s destination for a new head coach
Harbaugh is out there looking. There are other coaches too with better resumes than Marty Schottenhiemer 2.0
Not true. They speculated thats what happened. It was a call from the sideline
It was a calculated gamble that didn't work. So what? In the end, the risk taking didn't affect the outcome. I have no problem with the call.
-
21 hours ago, JoeSchmoe said:
Now that I'm blocked (and happy to be)... A public service message to everyone else here.
One of the key standards on this board is to debate the comment, not the poster. There's only one poster in here that I feel consistently bullies people around.. Often times under the guise of debating the post. When you say things like I've seen said to others that, this is "truly the dumbest thing I've ever seen", it goes way beyond debating the post. You've taken a piece out of the poster.
Again, AS I SAID, likely Tage's struggles are due to a surgery he's put off or just lack of motivation. Just after seeing one of my favourite players of the Jays '15 run go down like Colo did, my mind still goes there.
To the other posters that come on here, and consistently say things I don't agree with... Cheers! I'll try not to berate you, or treat you poorly. We all have our own lived experiences to get us to where we are today. Also, many of you are legitimately funny. I'm not sure if you're trolling or genuinely mean it, but keep doing what you're doing because you're entertaining nonetheless.
Go Sabres!
Accusing a player or even suggesting a player is using PEDs when there is not a scintilla of evidence of it is crossing the ethical line, even on a bulletin board where there is a loose standard in presenting one's opinions. The participants here give good and bad takes. There is nothing unusual about that in this type of setting. But making a scurrilous comment questioning the integrity of a player by even suggesting that he is cheating is not acceptable, especially when there is nothing to indicate the behavior. I don't want to come off as a sanctimonious moralizer but in my opinion you crossed the line here. Just because you don't necessarily like the poster who called you out doesn't mean that the substance of what he said doesn't have merit.
-
2
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:
Bro - the fake punt.
That's McDermott in a nutshell. Coaches a solid game, and then barfs on himself at a crucial juncture.
The fact that that call didn't lose the game was a stroke of good fortune for him.
As explained by the announcers, the fake punt was called at the line because KC only had ten men on the field. It was a good (understandable) call that didn't work.
-
This was a great game. Two very good teams with elite qbs. As others have said, the difference in this game was our drops. The Diggs drop was a pivotal play. It was a well thrown ball and the coverage was good. If would have been a tough catch but the big-play opportunity was not seized. We also caught a potential game-changing break when their back fumbled the ball into the end-zone when they were on the doorstep of closing this game out.
It was apparent to me that the accumulation of injuries on defense took a toll. KC was smart to control the clock by running it at the end of the game. You have to give Mahomes his due. He arguably is the best qb in the game. Although Lamar Jackson is the MVP in this season.
In the end: It was wide-right all over again. Where did I see that before?
-
1 minute ago, Taro T said:
Thanks for the link. Had only heard Granato's postgame comments in the past week on Monday. (We park pretty far from the rink and unless we're in a rush back to the car, he's usually finishing up or done by the time we get the radio on.) And only caught his response to Hamsammich's Q about them standing around on the 1st PP they had that game. Which the team did. Granato's response was either a falsehood or delusional. He said that they'd just watched that particular PP before him coming out for the PC and they had a lot of opportunities that they just missed on that one.
I'm not into excuses about how this season has disappointingly transpired. But the biggest difference between success and failure has been the play of our PP. Teams have adjusted to what we do the PP. We haven't sufficiently adjusted to their adjustments. (As others have pointed out.) As I said in a prior post, the difference between most teams in this league is small. From my view, I thought this was an evenly played game. Some teams are more proficient in their attention to detail. We made a few glaring errors in trying to get the puck out of our zone; they capitalized on them.
-
20 minutes ago, Sabres Fan in NS said:
Different coaching - yes.
Bad coaching - no. I don't think so.
Also, nagging injury.
TT probably does have a nagging injury but so do a lot of players. In all sports, the opposition makes adjustments to players, especially to the best players. What TT wants to do is being taken away from him. That's why teams scout. What he has to do is make an adjustment to the adjustment. Compared to last year, when he had a breakout year, he has less time and space to work with. He needs to handle the puck less by passing it more quickly and stop trying to go through the defense when it is clogged. What he needs to do is be less cute with the puck (too much dangling) and get back to basics i.e. more quickly shoot and pass. He needs to simplify his game, as do a lot of his teammates.
-
3
-
3
-
-
23 minutes ago, Taro T said:
But it isn't really a defensive focus IMHO, it's more of a maintain puck possession philosophy that they execute poorly. They curl back to the blue line after getting the puck into the opponent's zone rather than challenging defenders to force the puck low. Theoretically, that should maintain puck possession, but they make bad passes after the curl and end up losing the puck.
In the neutral zone and in their own end, they drop the puck back to a D man further back, or if they aren't pressured, they just hang stationary waiting for teammates to get further up ice presumably forcing the other team back closer to their blue line theoretically opening up space in the neutral zone to gain speed for an aggressive entry. But they rarely actually transition that puck deep into the other team's zone with pace and bodies.
Your comments about the reluctance to get the puck down low is the center piece of DG's post-game comments. This tendency to instead throw the puck back to the defensemen is taking the opposite approach that what the coach wants them to do. (as you point out )You can't always shoot the puck behind the net because there are many times when carrying/passing the puck is the right thing to do to attack the offensive zone. But if the play is not there, then shoot the puck in low and chase it. The problem is that battling for the puck behind the net requires tenacity and grit. This group is more comfortable with perimeter play that requires less physical play.
What bothered me about the post-game comments by the coach is that it was apparent that the down-low strategy was supposed to be a focus of attention. Yet, the coach's instructions weren't adequately followed. Hockey has a rapid back and forth flow to it where it is impossible strictly follow a game plan. However, when a pre-game strategy is emphasized and the players don't follow it, then there is both a coaching and player problem. The word that comes to me that fits this situation is accountability. Where is it?
Look back, in all three games we lost, I can't objectively say that we were outplayed. The margin of error between us and some of the better teams in the league is small. The difference is the attention to detail throughout the game. You have to be able to play smart and tough. We just seem incapable of keeping these two basic attributes up throughout the game.
In this game, I thought that the Benson penalty at a critical juncture was atrocious. I'm not saying that it was a reason why we lost. It just seemed like a poor judgment and weird call.
https://www.nhl.com/sabres/video/don-granato-postgame-vs-tb-6345267850112
-
1 hour ago, SwampD said:
With every passing day, Twitter makes us all a little dumber.
I don't like people who don't return their carts to the return area. What this car narc fool doesn't understand is that there are too many angry and volatile people who carry guns and react in a manner that can be deadly. People get shot for accidently bumping into others in a variety of settings. This car narc fool is too clueless to understand that he could be putting himself in danger by dealing with people he doesn't know.
-
1
-
-
If the Sabres win this game, their homestand record will be 4-2. I would consider it a success even though I would have hoped for a loser point from one of the losses. If they lose, this team will be spinning its wheels and fall back. Not moving forward in the congested eastern conference means falling back. Although it is a cliche----this is a big game for us.
Play hard/play simple/and shoot the freaking puck!
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:
I agree, but he should be more physical than he is to be truly effective. Pretty sure this is why Minnesota felt they could ditch him. Not physical enough and they already have more physical guys for those roles. Not good value for what they were paying him and their cap structure.
I have zero problems with the trade of a 2nd for him. He's overpaid for what he brings but we have cap room so don't care about that. I'd gladly trade another 2nd for a good face off/PK guy to pair with him.
I have no problem using a 2nd round pick to pair with him or using the pick for another solid NHL player.
On the other hand, I disagree with you regarding his value to cap ratio. This was a solid deal that benefited this team. He adds a style of strong play and big presence that was lacking on this team. It should be noted that it was the HC who worked with him prior to the pros who pushed for this deal. And breaking away from the topic on hand, I would say that the Clifton and Johnson deal have proved out to be solid deals that helped shore up this problematic blue line unit. I realize that it took some time for Clifton to find his comfort level.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, inkman said:
These threads are the exact reason why so many of us push back so hard on the “Trade rumors threads”. It’s almost all morons with no facts at all, just dreaming up their favorite fantasy trades. Not anything based in reality. Then someone jumps 3 pages in and assumes that a deal is imminent. Just complete stupidity.
I agree with you that this particular "rumor" thread was based on nothing factual. On the other hand, the issue of Greenway's value to the team is worth discussing. Is the value issue more appropriate in another thread? Maybe so? How many Mitts trade scenarios have been discussed here when there were no factual indications that the organization had any interest in dealing him? Some people are sticklers to adhering to the topic as written. I'm not one of them. I see nothing wrong with taking a topic and expanding it a little.
-
6 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:
I wouldn't trade Greenway because, although he does not play to his size or tough enough for what I want on our bottom 6, he does bring elements that are sorely lacking in many of our offensively leaning forwards. Like his PK ability.
I disagree that he doesn't play to his size. He's certainly not a thumper but he is a big player who plays strong. He doesn't get bumped off the puck or his position. I don't want to overrate his talents but as you have acknowledged he gives us a physical/big presence that this roster lacks. And, as you have also noted his PK is more than solid.
KA gets a lot of justifiable criticisms. However, the acquisition of Greenway for a second-round pick that was acquired in the Eichel deal was a good value deal that better rounded out our roster.
-
2
-
-
59 minutes ago, Porous Five Hole said:
Comrie has already cleared waivers once so I wouldn’t worry about that…
It is an issue with me. As the season advances, injuries happen. Especially for teams in the playoff hunt, he would be a backup to consider that would cost you nothing because he would be a waiver acquisition. I don't want to over-rate his value but having three NHL goalies who have played in the league is worth keeping in our system.
-
8 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:
Can we send Levi down now? UPL has earned the net with back to back shutouts (granted against the 2 worst teams in the NHL). How does sitting on the bench in the NHL help Levi or the Sabres. Comrie or some other scrub can sit on the bench just as easily Levi. The beauty of it is that Levi may find his game in Rochester and if UPL falters, Levi can always be recalled.
My understanding is that Comrie is out of options. In the attempt to bring him up there is a chance that he can be claimed. UPL is on a good run. However, he is vulnerable to getting injured (as all goalies are). Stay the course.
-
9 hours ago, K-9 said:
I pretty much feel the same way. This team is missing pieces. But as one of his harshest critics since he was playing like crap with the Amerks, I’m that much more happy for Oopie’s recent turnaround and I hope he continues to make a liar out of me.
Your deep doghouse has rehabilitated a number of players on this team. Mitts was chained to the house, and due to your constant whipping, he successfully rehabbed. Clinton was chained to your punishing shack house for a spell, and then he seemed to recover his game. UPL is a big fellow who required a bigger dog- house to get in. Your rehab tools (whip?) seemed to have worked on him. Who is your next candidate to occupy your rehabilitation facility? It's working. Keep up the good work. The old school stern schoolmaster is a catholic school tradition. It works. I got the scars to prove it. 😃
-
Obviously, UPL gets the first star.
The Sabres played a simplified game, mostly north/south. Nothing fancy, mostly workmanlike.
Girgs plays a hard and fast game. He's one of the hardest workers on the team.
I like Benson's game. He gives us more offensive net presence than anyone else on the team. When Dahlin got a deflection off of a Hawk stick for a goal, Benson was in front of the net.
There isn't too much to analyze in this game. The superior team controlled the play. When the Hawks shot there wasn't much follow-up. One and done with our defense retrieving the puck.
A win is a win. The biggest takeaway is that UPL seems to have solidified his position as our #1 goalie. He's a big goalie who plays big with an economy of motion. He's well position and is playing under control with no scrambling. Right now, he is a very confident goalie.
We need to finish this extended homestand with a win against a team that is much superior to the team we played tonight. I will consider this homestand a success if we beat Tampa.
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:
Have we had the most fragile team over the last two years?
No. Injuries are a factor for all teams. We're just more aware of them for the home team.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, LGR4GM said:
It doesn't matter because what I said is still true. I am using the word true because correct isn't the correct word.
Levi's last start was against Seattle where he was bad, that was 8 days ago. The Sabres have played 3 games since then and all of them went to UPL. So if they do give Levi the start we have about 8 days in between starts and sure enough it is 1 game out of 4.
We are all well aware that everything you say is true. So, it is not necessary to toot your horn. When a person is as omniscient as you obvious are, you've earned the right to boast. I humbly genuflect to your overwhelming wisdom that is bestowed upon us peasants. You are a shining light in the darkness.
-
4
-
-
Just now, LGR4GM said:
No it doesn't. It comes down to Levi being terrible over the last month and instead of getting starts and development, starting every 4th game and looking like flaming trash.
So either way that 4th Sabres game gets trash goaltending except now, Levi doesn't get game reps because he plays once every 10 days.
You're shortsighted in this and I'm inclined to both sides that.
Do you know who is in net today? I didn't see it announced in the game thread?
-
Just now, LGR4GM said:
Sending Levi to Rochester is what serious organizations focused on winning do. He's been bad in Buffalo this year.
Not really, no.
We just disagree. I don't know how anyone can conclude that Comrie would be a better option than Levi as a backup goalie for the Sabres. It comes down to: different eyes have different visions. That's okay.
OT: Weather (just weather)
in The Aud Club
Posted
The issue I am bringing up doesn't deal with the variety of companies that draw their electricity from the Texas grid. The issue is that the Texas grid is a separate/independent grid that doesn't have the ability to draw from the national grid when part of its system goes down. This is by design. So, when part of its system is damaged/shut down due to weather, tornados etc. it takes longer to get back on-line in comparison to other regions that are tied to the national system and temporally can get electricity from outside sources.