deluca67 Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 This is my first chance to listen to the show. Does Sylvester spend the entire two hours defending/apologizing for the Sabres? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 This is my first chance to listen to the show. Does Sylvester spend the entire two hours defending/apologizing for the Sabres? Haha! Same exact situatuon for me. First time for me listening to the show and Dimples is defending Ruff to the death. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 Haha! Same exact situatuon for me. First time for me listening to the show and Dimples is defending Ruff to the death. I had to turn it off. It's a great concept for a show. Having a Sabres employee host the show is the bad idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fan2456 Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 I had to turn it off. It's a great concept for a show. Having a Sabres employee host the show is the bad idea. That makes three of us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carpandean Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 (edited) This is my first chance to listen to the show. Does Sylvester spend the entire two hours defending/apologizing for the Sabres? I've listened to several shows over the past week. This morning has been, by far, his biggest homer moment. He's certainly biased, as expected, but not normally to the level you heard. Edited July 2, 2012 by carpandean Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloSoldier2010 Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 Those of you listening to him between 11:05 and 11:07, hilarious, basically talked in a circle about how its "okay to disagree with me, but sometimes I'm gonna counter and disagree with what you say and ask you to back up" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 I would love a league-wide NHL show in that slot, but I'll take this. And as others have said, I'd take just about anything over Cowherd. Good lord. Cowherd's arrogant delivery, basically "telling" you the truth about sports is unappealing and condescending. If they teamed up K Slice (love it) with Peters and had regular spots for Roby, Ray and RJ, I think the show would do well. Maybe that's in the fold already just waiting until the season starts. Hell, i'd throw Georges LaRaque in their as well. He's entertaining. Peters, Georges, Rayzer and John Scott can do a weekly roundtable about punching and getting punched. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloSoldier2010 Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 Cowherd's arrogant delivery, basically "telling" you the truth about sports is unappealing and condescending. If they teamed up K Slice (love it) with Peters and had regular spots for Roby, Ray and RJ, I think the show would do well. Maybe that's in the fold already just waiting until the season starts. Hell, i'd throw Georges LaRaque in their as well. He's entertaining. Peters, Georges, Rayzer and John Scott can do a weekly roundtable about punching and getting punched. :worthy: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 Cowherd's arrogant delivery, basically "telling" you the truth about sports is unappealing and condescending. If they teamed up K Slice (love it) with Peters and had regular spots for Roby, Ray and RJ, I think the show would do well. Maybe that's in the fold already just waiting until the season starts. Hell, i'd throw Georges LaRaque in their as well. He's entertaining. Peters, Georges, Rayzer and John Scott can do a weekly roundtable about punching and getting punched. Combine that with his love of all things NBA, 'West Coast,' front runners, repeating himself endlessly and you have my reasons for disliking his show. Not a big deal, I know there are people that dig his schtick, but I'd rather listen to just about anything but him on the radio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spndnchz Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 Boyes with NY radio: http://islanders.nhl.com/club/podcastplayer.htm?pid=379&iid=40018 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 Boyes with NY radio: http://islanders.nhl...d=379&iid=40018 clever intro music Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 Today was by far the worst show he has had since he was pure defensive mode. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 Today was by far the worst show he has had since he was pure defensive mode. I'm not even sure I heard a word he said. It was like mindless babbling in the background. It still wasn't Cowherd, though, and that's a plus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two or less Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 Today was by far the worst show he has had since he was pure defensive mode. When i heard about this show, it was common sense that this was just a propaganda Sabres show, but todays show was brutal. Even this show needs to realize not every single caller and listener is a kool-aid drinking fan. For Sylvester to pour on Brad Boyes and support Lindy Ruff is ridiculous. I hated Boyes, and he was awful here but Ruff/Regier brought him here, and Ruff is far from a perfect head coach. Sylvester making Ruff sound like the greatest coach since slice bread earlier today was disgusting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spndnchz Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 Even this homer thought it was over the top. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 I'm not a big fan of Sylvester being on the air by himself. I love listening to the guy. He knows his hockey and such, but when he's by himself it gets really dry. He needs someone there to bounce things off of. Pair him up with a solid co-host and the show will be perfect. Honestly, I'd love to have Peters join the show full time. The guy is great to listen to and I think they play off each other very well. Peters or Brian Duff would be great co hosts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two or less Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 Peters or Brian Duff would be great co hosts. I loved Peters on YNN's nightly show "Hockey tonight" when he was their hockey "expert". That would be a great addition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 Bottom line.......a guy is now making 25% the $$ the Sabres were paying him just 3 months ago. That's like paying $200K for a house in February 2011....and selling it today for $50K. The efficient move should have been to bury him in Rochester or buy him out. His massive dropoff either shows a deficciency in management....or a misuse by the coach. When you use an example like this, and Pegula's money is no object, these are concrete examples of failure. You can't defend it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insomniac Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 Bottom line.......a guy is now making 25% the $$ the Sabres were paying him just 3 months ago. That's like paying $200K for a house in February 2011....and selling it today for $50K. The efficient move should have been to bury him in Rochester or buy him out. His massive dropoff either shows a deficciency in management....or a misuse by the coach. When you use an example like this, and Pegula's money is no object, these are concrete examples of failure. You can't defend it. Erm...wrong thread? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 Bottom line.......a guy is now making 25% the $$ the Sabres were paying him just 3 months ago. That's like paying $200K for a house in February 2011....and selling it today for $50K. The efficient move should have been to bury him in Rochester or buy him out. His massive dropoff either shows a deficciency in management....or a misuse by the coach. When you use an example like this, and Pegula's money is no object, these are concrete examples of failure. You can't defend it. Sully, There was no reason in the world to believe he was going to be as bad this year as he was. He finished off last season strong. Once they started the season with him, and there was no incentive to demote him to save cap space. I don't think this shows a misuse by the coach nor a deficiency in management. This shows a big swing to try and make the team better, and a miss (except in the Shootout, Dude was a f'n wizard). I want them to take big swings. Grigorenko is a perfect example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 Bottom line.......a guy is now making 25% the $$ the Sabres were paying him just 3 months ago. That's like paying $200K for a house in February 2011....and selling it today for $50K. The efficient move should have been to bury him in Rochester or buy him out. His massive dropoff either shows a deficciency in management....or a misuse by the coach. When you use an example like this, and Pegula's money is no object, these are concrete examples of failure. You can't defend it. Right, because his production wasn't already in steep decline when the Sabres traded for him. Wait, it was? Oh, well then... Boyes stinks. His goal totals went from 43 in 07-08, to 33 in 08-09, to 14 in 09-10, to 17 in 10-11, and finally 8 last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 Bottom line.......a guy is now making 25% the $$ the Sabres were paying him just 3 months ago. That's like paying $200K for a house in February 2011....and selling it today for $50K. The efficient move should have been to bury him in Rochester or buy him out. His massive dropoff either shows a deficciency in management....or a misuse by the coach. When you use an example like this, and Pegula's money is no object, these are concrete examples of failure. You can't defend it. I don't see how burying him in the minors or buying him out would have been better use of the asset? First, I would argue that he was a prime reason they made the playoffs last year, and this covered his cost alone. Second, you got approximately $1M worth of production from him last year. Putting him in the minors and replacing him with someone else doesn't save you any money, in fact, it costs you money unless you can guarantee that the replacement puts you in hte playoffs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 Fake Darcy @FakeDarcy His forehand and backhand “@BillHoppeNHL: Brad Boyes believes 'both sides' contributed to low production with #Sabreshttp://tinyurl.com/6vfz7ju” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 The ONLY constrain for Mr Pegula is the Salary Cap. His goal is stated as winning Stanley Cups. With upfront money being paid out, he is spending $90 million a year. If a player is not playing to or exceeding his salary cap number production wise....if money is truly no object, he should be burried. End of story. You then take that cap space and try it again. I would think he would rather spend $120 million to win a Cup than $90 million to miss the playoffs. If there is no way to accomplish this, then my folly, but the fact that he is a $1 million guy a year removed from acquiring him, that is a waste of $3 million in cap space. How much counts against the cap if you buy him out? How much if you send him to the minors? How much if you buy Elmira and force him to play there of give him a $2 million "relocation fee"? Boyes was an example of a poor return on an asset if your only goal is to win the Stanley Cup and your only constraint is the salary cap. heck....Lieno, Vanek, Roy, Stafford, and Miller may be as well. If your point is to argue he wasn't a $4 million player when brough in....then Darcy is an idiot up front. If he was, then there is merit in saying Ruff is bad. Anything less than burrying him is a bad move if we are to believe things are different under Pegula. There should be a new mindset if Pegula is serious. You can't hit on every guy, but I would ask....who IS outplaying their salary cap number for the Sabres going into this year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 The ONLY constrain for Mr Pegula is the Salary Cap. His goal is stated as winning Stanley Cups. With upfront money being paid out, he is spending $90 million a year. If a player is not playing to or exceeding his salary cap number production wise....if money is truly no object, he should be burried. End of story. You then take that cap space and try it again. I would think he would rather spend $120 million to win a Cup than $90 million to miss the playoffs. If there is no way to accomplish this, then my folly, but the fact that he is a $1 million guy a year removed from acquiring him, that is a waste of $3 million in cap space. How much counts against the cap if you buy him out? How much if you send him to the minors? How much if you buy Elmira and force him to play there of give him a $2 million "relocation fee"? Boyes was an example of a poor return on an asset if your only goal is to win the Stanley Cup and your only constraint is the salary cap. heck....Lieno, Vanek, Roy, Stafford, and Miller may be as well. If your point is to argue he wasn't a $4 million player when brough in....then Darcy is an idiot up front. If he was, then there is merit in saying Ruff is bad. Anything less than burrying him is a bad move if we are to believe things are different under Pegula. There should be a new mindset if Pegula is serious. You can't hit on every guy, but I would ask....who IS outplaying their salary cap number for the Sabres going into this year? Pominville :D Also, Ehrhoff. Probably Leopold. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.