Eleven Posted November 14, 2013 Author Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 Because "change for the sake of change" is baloney. Yes, it is, but read what SDS wrote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted November 14, 2013 Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 Yes, it is, but read what SDS wrote. There were many here who didn't accept the stale argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted November 14, 2013 Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 He wasn't fired. Muckler was fired. Regier offered Nolan a 1 year contract which Nolan declined. In my best Johnny Carson voice...."Ooooouhmmmm....not so fast my friend....." http://www.buffalonews.com/article/19970702/CITYANDREGION/307029882 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted November 14, 2013 Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 How was that not the very definition of change for the sake of change? change for the sake of change is what happens when you change something even if it is going well. Things were not going well. The team wasn't winning under the core or the leadership. And beyond that the product wasn't entertaining. So, no it wasn't change for the sake of change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted November 14, 2013 Author Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 change for the sake of change is what happens when you change something even if it is going well. Things were not going well. The team wasn't winning under the core or the leadership. And beyond that the product wasn't entertaining. So, no it wasn't change for the sake of change. No. It's when things aren't going well, and someone throws a dart at a wall to decide what to change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calti Posted November 14, 2013 Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 He's back... and he's hornier than ever! B-) lol..STOP!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted November 14, 2013 Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 No. It's when things aren't going well, and someone throws a dart at a wall to decide what to change. I'm an engineer, not an English guy, but the change I desired had purpose beyond just change, therefore by definition refutes your point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted November 14, 2013 Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 Here's the real important thing to note on Nolan. The Sabres let him go in 1997. He didn't land another real coaching gig until Moncton of the Q hired him in 2005. Now there are stories that he had random offers here and there, but what exactly happens to keep a guy away from coaching for 8 years? This guy was poison, there's no doubt in my mind. Hopefully he has straightened that out. To be fair, it should also be noted that many hockey people believed Nolan was blackballed for having the gumption to stand up to the wanna-be "legend" John Muckler, who is perhaps one of the most over rated men in hockey. And then there are theories about his heritage that are well-documented from his playing days. But I personally think it had more to do with Muck's good ol' boy network than anything else. It might take a few weeks, and it might cause some pretty messed up lineups for a little while, but I'm looking forward to watching guys figure out that if you aren't competing every shift, you won't be getting a shift. And I suspect Drew Stafford is crapping bricks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Amerk Posted November 14, 2013 Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 To be fair, it should also be noted that many hockey people believed Nolan was blackballed for having the gumption to stand up to the wanna-be "legend" John Muckler, who is perhaps one of the most over rated men in hockey. And then there are theories about his heritage that are well-documented from his playing days. But I personally think it had more to do with Muck's good ol' boy network than anything else. It might take a few weeks, and it might cause some pretty messed up lineups for a little while, but I'm looking forward to watching guys figure out that if you aren't competing every shift, you won't be getting a shift. And I suspect Drew Stafford is crapping bricks. Nolan was offered jobs and turned them down, but I agree that he was blacklisted after what happened with Muckler then Regier. He also spent time focusing on his young family for awhile. I'm betting Kaleta is back REAL soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted November 14, 2013 Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 No. In effect Nolan was given a I'm-not-sure-if-this-will-work-so-we'll-keep-it-short contract. He was offered a job. I don't know in what universe being offered a job = being fired by the boss that was fired first. Get real weave. He was a Jack Adams winner and was offered a frickin' 1-year deal. Yeah, it's not being fired, but it's about as close as you can come to being told "Don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya." Nolan was offered jobs and turned them down, but I agree that he was blacklisted after what happened with Muckler then Regier. He also spent time focusing on his young family for awhile. I'm betting Kaleta is back REAL soon. Yep. Anything more than 10-14 days and I'll be surprised. Nolan's game was a lot like Kaleta's. If anybody can bring Patty K along the right way, I gotta think it's Teddy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristian Posted November 14, 2013 Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 I don't know enough about Ted Nolan to have an opinion on whether he's a good coach or not. I do know he's well though of as a motivator, and less as an x's and o's coach, that's about it. What I do know, however, is that Patty played under him for a full season, and apparently thinks enough of him to bring him back as an interim. That's good enough for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted November 14, 2013 Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 Uh man wish it was friday already, kaleta + scott in the line up vs Toronto, you'll just know he'd do it to test his players. See who stands up for their team mates, im expecting an all out bench brawl and nothing less :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kishoph Posted November 14, 2013 Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 I do like having Nolan back, but I do not think it will be long term. I have a bigger problem with lack of effort than "lack of talent" on this team, Nolan should be able to correct that. Talent means nothing if you're not trying. I can easily see Nolan bringing back up Kaleta and possibly another vet or two from Rochester, then sending down a couple of the kids to develop in the minors. One thing for sure, is I am excited to see the Sabres next game Friday night, and I haven't felt like that about too many Sabres games this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted November 14, 2013 Author Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 I'm an engineer, not an English guy, but the change I desired had purpose beyond just change, therefore by definition refutes your point. Well, hopefully, you have it now, because you certainly didn't have it last February. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted November 14, 2013 Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 Well, hopefully, you have it now, because you certainly didn't have it last February. It was partial back then. Now it's nearly complete (although I'm sick of hearing about Stafford and Miller too). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted November 14, 2013 Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 OK....here's an interesting storyline... How will Hodgson fare under Ted Nolan? It's one thing to be called out and benched as a floater by Ron Rolston, but given the family backstory and Nolan's insistence on bringing 100% effort and intensity, is Hodgson going to be the poster boy for setting the guys straight? If you're going to make a guy work til he pukes, he sure seems like the target. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted November 14, 2013 Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 OK....here's an interesting storyline... How will Hodgson fare under Ted Nolan? It's one thing to be called out and benched as a floater by Ron Rolston, but given the family backstory and Nolan's insistence on bringing 100% effort and intensity, is Hodgson going to be the poster boy for setting the guys straight? If you're going to make a guy work til he pukes, he sure seems like the target. I've been wondering this myself. This is another case where I could see it going either way. Of course, if it goes south, Hodgy did just get a 6-year extension (DR's favorite contract -- the long-term, upper-middle-class level contract for a guy who hasn't earned it yet, in the hope that he will turn into a really good player and the contract will prove out to be a bargain -- except that in most cases the players plateaued or got worse and the contracts proved out to be either mediocre or terrible). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted November 14, 2013 Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 OK....here's an interesting storyline... How will Hodgson fare under Ted Nolan? It's one thing to be called out and benched as a floater by Ron Rolston, but given the family backstory and Nolan's insistence on bringing 100% effort and intensity, is Hodgson going to be the poster boy for setting the guys straight? If you're going to make a guy work til he pukes, he sure seems like the target. Yep, most interesting story line of the rest of the season, IMO. Hodgson clearly has been brought up to see himself as a go-to guy. Can Ted make him that player, or does Cody already think he's there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted November 14, 2013 Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 OK....here's an interesting storyline... How will Hodgson fare under Ted Nolan? It's one thing to be called out and benched as a floater by Ron Rolston, but given the family backstory and Nolan's insistence on bringing 100% effort and intensity, is Hodgson going to be the poster boy for setting the guys straight? If you're going to make a guy work til he pukes, he sure seems like the target. If Nolan starts screwing with our only player (okay, Moulson is producing too) consistently producing offense, I may have an aneurysm. I've been wondering this myself. This is another case where I could see it going either way. Of course, if it goes south, Hodgy did just get a 6-year extension (DR's favorite contract -- the long-term, upper-middle-class level contract for a guy who hasn't earned it yet, in the hope that he will turn into a really good player and the contract will prove out to be a bargain -- except that in most cases the players plateaued or got worse and the contracts proved out to be either mediocre or terrible). Meh? Meh. I think Hodgson is already earning his contract, so I'm not too worried about it ending up being terrible. Looking at the closest comparables on capgeek, the only players who are clearly a better value at the price also signed their contracts a few years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted November 14, 2013 Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 If Nolan starts screwing with our only player (okay, Moulson is producing too) consistently producing offense, I may have an aneurysm. Meh? Meh. I think Hodgson is already earning his contract, so I'm not too worried about it ending up being terrible. Looking at the closest comparables on capgeek, the only players who are clearly a better value at the price also signed their contracts a few years ago. You and I must be the only people here who like how Hodgson is playing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted November 14, 2013 Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 If Nolan starts screwing with our only player (okay, Moulson is producing too) consistently producing offense, I may have an aneurysm. Meh? Meh. I think Hodgson is already earning his contract, so I'm not too worried about it ending up being terrible. Looking at the closest comparables on capgeek, the only players who are clearly a better value at the price also signed their contracts a few years ago. Leaving aside the cryptic "Meh"s, I think you may be getting too caught up in Hodgy's numbers (such as they are). He clearly has had a disappointing season. He may not be playing quite as badly as some of his teammates, but he's certainly not earned a pass from anyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted November 14, 2013 Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 You and I must be the only people here who like how Hodgson is playing. I like parts of his game. He is so close and could be a legitimate guy but he doesn't have the all around package of 2way play. He either needs to learn it or you need to put a winger on each side that plays that game. For instance Dumont worked with Briere. It is why I wanted to keep Pominville over Vanek. Pominville made Hodgson less liable and it helped. Hopefully LaFontaine can get the right mix because darcy never could. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted November 14, 2013 Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 Nolan's practice today - any meaning to the groupings? Random? In GOLD: Moulson-Hodgson-Stafford-Larsson WHITE: Girgensons-Ennis-Grigorenko-Ott GREEN: Leino-Foligno-Flynn BLUE: Scott-McCormick-Tropp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted November 14, 2013 Author Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 You and I must be the only people here who like how Hodgson is playing. No, I'm happy with him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted November 14, 2013 Report Share Posted November 14, 2013 (edited) You and I must be the only people here who like how Hodgson is playing. I am a Cody fan; I think it's ridiculous the ###### he gets given the fact he has been one of our most effective players in this disaster of a season. I also think he needs to learn that it's not good enough to just be in the right position; there are times when you need to push ahead of your opponent, to beat him with your body instead of always waiting to outsmart him. That Roy quote about Girgorenko not realizing how much harder he is capable of working applies to Hodgson as well. Edited November 14, 2013 by dudacek 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.