Did not realize the Sabres were 31st in attendance...pathetic

[Porous Five Hole]

It has been mentioned before, but one factor is how the scalpers got booted from the season ticket base.  And gone are the $16 tickets people were used to.  
 

The price expectation will take a while to reset for fans, and the team will have to be good to justify the cost in the short term.  

[K-9]

The LAST people of blame for poor attendance are the fans. 

[MBD]

7 minutes ago, K-9 said:

The LAST people of blame for poor attendance are the fans. 

True.  They're the ones attending games...

[SwampD]

About 6 or so years ago, we were camping at Beaver Meadow campground over Columbus Day weekend. I was standing in Tops in Arcade with a Sabres hat in my hand (there was a little section of Bills and Sabres gear). I said, “no way” and put it back on the rack. I really needed a hat, too.

I made a decision on that day to not spend another cent on them until they deserved it. It was a really easy decision to make, too. They chose the path of a multi year plan to lose on purpose, not me.

If they we’re just bad, it would be one thing, but they chose to be bad. I’m not going to support that and I don’t feel one bit guilty about it. They chose to suck, they sucked, I’m out.

 

I will be spending money on them next year.

[JujuFish]

1 hour ago, MBD said:

There's no game.  It was a simple question.  You're saying they're incompetent.  They've spent resources up the wazoo on players, facilities, coaches and GMs.  And still the team has sucked under their ownership.  So, again, should they sell the team, with the chance that the new owner(ship group) sees the lack of fan support and takes them elsewhere?

Oh sure, no game at all. You keep trying to shift the conversation and won't answer me straight up. Do you think the Pegulas, who have now set a record level of futility across the entire league, have not done poorly?

[MBD]

23 minutes ago, JujuFish said:

Oh sure, no game at all. You keep trying to shift the conversation and won't answer me straight up. Do you think the Pegulas, who have now set a record level of futility across the entire league, have not done poorly?

The team has done poorly.  But last I checked, they don't manage, coach or play.  They kept Ruff and Regier after buying the team and gave them all the money they needed.  They failed.  Then they moved on, hiring a fan favorite (Ted Nolan) and a SC-winning HC (Bylsma), who also failed.  They drafted a "generational" player in Eichel...and still kept losing.  But since the losing has been since they bought the team, it's all on them, right?  So the only conclusion that can be reached is they should sell the team. 

Again, do you favor them doing that.  And if the team moves, because the new owner sees the attendance and would rather take a chance in a bigger market, what then?

Or do you think they're intentionally trying to make the Sabres bad.  If so, what can they do to make it good?

Edited April 23, 2022 by MBD

[klos1963]

How would anyone not realize that if they've been watching games?

[Eleven]

The team was horrible for four months (and started six different goaltenders) and depends, more than any other team in the league, on cross-border traffic.  I'm not too worried.

[LGR4GM]

3 hours ago, MBD said:

Yup.  Maybe that threat is what's needed.

Bye. They sell the team, it leaves, bye. 

I figured out years ago it's easy to live somewhere without an nhl team. Especially one that's been the dumpster fire Buffalo has been. 

5 minutes ago, MBD said:

So that's one vote for "they should sell the team."  And if they do and the team moves?

Idc if they sell. And your quote here is a lie. That's not what I said. 

Edited April 23, 2022 by LGR4GM

[LGR4GM]

38 minutes ago, MBD said:

The team has done poorly.  But last I checked, they don't manage, coach or play.  They kept Ruff and Regier after buying the team and gave them all the money they needed.  They failed.  Then they moved on, hiring a fan favorite (Ted Nolan) and a SC-winning HC (Bylsma), who also failed.  They drafted a "generational" player in Eichel...and still kept losing.  But since the losing has been since they bought the team, it's all on them, right?  So the only conclusion that can be reached is they should sell the team. 

Again, do you favor them doing that.  And if the team moves, because the new owner sees the attendance and would rather take a chance in a bigger market, what then?

Or do you think they're intentionally trying to make the Sabres bad.  If so, what can they do to make it good?

Oh... I see you have some other agenda. You're in here playing games. 

[JohnC]

12 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Was a stupid comment 3 years ago and nothings changed. Just a dumb ignorant, sexist, trash comment. 

For the record, Kim and Terry are to blame for the state of the Sabres and I want neither around the team. 

As far as hockey decisions I'm not sure they are currently involved in the hockey operation. There is no doubt that the owners have a say when money considerations are involved, just like every owner does. To the GM's credit he has rebuilt the hockey operation and has assembled a quality staff. The historical problem as you noted is that they were too involved in the hockey decisions. The worst and most foolish interventions were when they first took ownership. Money was being spent at a high rate in the belief that throwing money around was a quick way to buy respectability. As with the Bills when they bought the team the owners had a learning curve that included some hard lessons. I believe they have belatedly learned their lesson with the hockey team and now have a better understanding on how to operate a franchise. 

[MBD]

15 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Bye. They sell the team, it leaves, bye. 

I figured out years ago it's easy to live somewhere without an nhl team. Especially one that's been the dumpster fire Buffalo has been. 

Idc if they sell. And your quote here is a lie. That's not what I said. 

11 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Oh... I see you have some other agenda. You're in here playing games. 

What's with the "game" stuff?  I'm asking point blank how does the team get fixed?  They're the owners.  Having "neither around the team" isn't feasible nor is it an answer.  Therefore selling is the only option.  And given the market size and support, no matter the reason, there's a good chance the team could me moved if it's sold.

As for not caring if the team leaves, that's an interesting take.  I wonder how many share your sentiment?

[MBD]

5 minutes ago, JohnC said:

As far as hockey decisions I'm not sure they are currently involved in the hockey operation. There is no doubt that the owners have a say when money considerations are involved, just like every owner does. To the GM's credit he has rebuilt the hockey operation and has assembled a quality staff. The historical problem as you noted is that they were too involved in the hockey decisions. The worst and most foolish interventions were when they first took ownership. Money was being spent at a high rate in the belief that throwing money around was a quick way to buy respectability. As with the Bills when they bought the team the owners had a learning curve that included some hard lessons. I believe they have belatedly learned their lesson with the hockey team and now have a better understanding on how to operate a franchise. 

Now we're getting somewhere.  The Pegulas inherited Ruff and Regier, who had been wildly successful under the skinflint Golisano.  They gave them the resources (that Golisano did not) that they needed to get players for a team that had made the playoffs the year before.  What went wrong?  Was merely giving them all the money they wanted what make them bad?  Were they telling the GMs who to get?

[JohnC]

2 minutes ago, MBD said:

Now we're getting somewhere.  The Pegulas inherited Ruff and Regier, who had been wildly successful under the skinflint Golisano.  They gave them the resources (that Golisano did not) that they needed to get players for a team that had made the playoffs the year before.  What went wrong?  Was merely giving them all the money they wanted what make them bad?  Were they telling the GMs who to get?

Let me start off with your comment about Golisano. He saved this franchise from not only folding but also being moved. He bought this team when it was in bankruptcy. When he took over he discovered that the financial books were in a state of chaos where franchise funds were intermingled with private accounts. What he did was sort out the entangled financials and put this chaotic franchise on a hard budget. That not only was the right thing to do but the necessary thing to do in order to make the franchise financially viable. Without being obligated to do so he paid all the vendors, some of them he wasn't required to do because of the bankruptcy laws. Without question he brought order and professionalization to the whole operation, that included the hockey and business parts. 

When he sold the franchise to the Pegulas he claimed that he had higher offers that would have resulted in the franchise being moved. My understanding is that the commissioner, Bettman, was not going to allow that to happen. At the news conference of the sale to Pegula Golisano noted that he had a clause in the contract to sell that if the Pegulas decided to sell the franchise it still couldn't be moved. In my view Golisano should be praised and not criticized for how he ran the franchise and for how he handled the sale of it. 

With respect to the Pegulas as owners they were most at fault for the demise of this franchise during their stewardship. Hopefully, they have learned from their mistakes. I strongly believe that they have. 

[dudacek]

This is an oddly timed thread, considering that the attendance has been horrible all season and the numbers have been slowly climbing the past month or two.

The fans will come back as the team earns it.

They're starting to do just that.

[MBD]

13 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Let me start off with your comment about Golisano. He saved this franchise from not only folding but also being moved. He bought this team when it was in bankruptcy. When he took over he discovered that the financial books were in a state of chaos where franchise funds were intermingled with private accounts. What he did was sort out the entangled financials and put this chaotic franchise on a hard budget. That not only was the right thing to do but the necessary thing to do in order to make the franchise financially viable. Without being obligated to do so he paid all the vendors, some of them he wasn't required to do because of the bankruptcy laws. Without question he brought order and professionalization to the whole operation, that included the hockey and business parts. 

When he sold the franchise to the Pegulas he claimed that he had higher offers that would have resulted in the franchise being moved. My understanding is that the commissioner, Bettman, was not going to allow that to happen. At the news conference of the sale to Pegula Golisano noted that he had a clause in the contract to sell that if the Pegulas decided to sell the franchise it still couldn't be moved. In my view Golisano should be praised and not criticized for how he ran the franchise and for how he handled the sale of it. 

With respect to the Pegulas as owners they were most at fault for the demise of this franchise during their stewardship. Hopefully, they have learned from their mistakes. I strongly believe that they have. 

Sorry, I didn't mean to impugn Golisano stewardship of the Sabres.  I agree with everything you said, especially about saving the franchise, several times.  I meant "skinflint" in that he didn't spend nearly as much as the Pegulas have, and I admit I should have chosen a better word.

I just don't know what they could have done differently.  Ralph was criticized for being cheap with coaches and players.  The Pegulas are the opposite.  And yet they failed miserably with the Sabres, whereas they're doing great with the Bills.

[JujuFish]

2 hours ago, MBD said:

The team has done poorly.  But last I checked, they don't manage, coach or play.  They kept Ruff and Regier after buying the team and gave them all the money they needed.  They failed.  Then they moved on, hiring a fan favorite (Ted Nolan) and a SC-winning HC (Bylsma), who also failed.  They drafted a "generational" player in Eichel...and still kept losing.  But since the losing has been since they bought the team, it's all on them, right?  So the only conclusion that can be reached is they should sell the team. 

Again, do you favor them doing that.  And if the team moves, because the new owner sees the attendance and would rather take a chance in a bigger market, what then?

Or do you think they're intentionally trying to make the Sabres bad.  If so, what can they do to make it good?

It's a simple yes or no question.  Do you think the Pegulas have done a poor job?

[Doohickie]

43 minutes ago, MBD said:

And yet they failed miserably with the Sabres, whereas they're doing great with the Bills.

I think the Pegulas never trusted Murray or Botterill.  And from that, they tried to keep a hand on the tiller to steer the franchise.  The problem is, their vision didn't match the GM's vision and so you ended up with the meddling owners narrative.  Right motivation, wrong tactics.

Kevyn Adams had worked in the Sabres organization before taking the GM job.  He knew the Peguals.  He knew how to talk to the Pegulas. They trust him.  I think that's the difference. 

Murray was famous for his ZFG attitude and it filtered all the way down to the players.

Botterill is a good numbers guy, and good contracts guy, but he didn't understand how to take all those individual parts and make a whole out of them.  He knew about stats and stuff but seemed blind to the human dimension.

Kevyn was on a Stanley Cup winner and he understands what team chemistry means.  He was able to articulate what he wanted to do to the Pegulas and eventually got them on board.  I think his first summer was about trying to make Jack and Ralph happy, but thereafter you can see a steady building of a certain character, a certain identity, a certain direction for this team.  He is, I think, also smart enough to know what he doesn't know and brings in the right people to advise him.

The Sabres have reflected their GMs and HCs, and the first two GMs under the Pegulas did not bring the proper visions.

9 minutes ago, JujuFish said:

It's a simple yes or no question.  Do you think the Pegulas have done a poor job?

I think they hired two poor GMs and then a good GM.

[nucci]

If only paying attention a little bit this year, hard not to know this

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, MBD said:

Sorry, I didn't mean to impugn Golisano stewardship of the Sabres.  I agree with everything you said, especially about saving the franchise, several times.  I meant "skinflint" in that he didn't spend nearly as much as the Pegulas have, and I admit I should have chosen a better word.

I just don't know what they could have done differently.  Ralph was criticized for being cheap with coaches and players.  The Pegulas are the opposite.  And yet they failed miserably with the Sabres, whereas they're doing great with the Bills.

The owners are doing well with the Bills because after a number of misfires he hired the right HC and GM, and then allowed them to do their jobs without any consequential interference. The Pegulas hired a recently fired coach in Rex Ryan because he said he wanted to hire a prominent name and give this nondescript franchise some relevancy. It was a dumb and damaging reason to hire him. Eventually he got it right and then good things followed. My impression (can't say for sure) is that he is belatedly following the right hiring course for the hockey franchise. 

[LGR4GM]

2 hours ago, MBD said:

What's with the "game" stuff?  I'm asking point blank how does the team get fixed?  They're the owners.  Having "neither around the team" isn't feasible nor is it an answer.  Therefore selling is the only option.  And given the market size and support, no matter the reason, there's a good chance the team could me moved if it's sold.

As for not caring if the team leaves, that's an interesting take.  I wonder how many share your sentiment?

By the Pegulas staying out of the gms office. 

Also first time in this thread you've asked that.

As to the market support, why isn't the market supporting the team currently? Tell me that. 

[PromoTheRobot]

4 hours ago, JujuFish said:

Oh sure, no game at all. You keep trying to shift the conversation and won't answer me straight up. Do you think the Pegulas, who have now set a record level of futility across the entire league, have not done poorly?

Sure. But what matters is where things are heading. The Bills playoff drought felt like it would never end. Now look at them. Do you hear anyone taking about it anymore? 

[Believer]

7 hours ago, MBD said:

Yup.  Maybe that threat is what's needed.

What do you mean??… KA is less than three years as GM and Granato two years as Coach… and the roster is rid of the malcontents… and full of a good mix of vets and youth who want to be here and play with purpose and passion… Sabres are only missing a couple pieces for a legit playoff run next season… 

[PromoTheRobot]

22 minutes ago, Believer said:

What do you mean??… KA is less than three years as GM and Granato two years as Coach… and the roster is rid of the malcontents… and full of a good mix of vets and youth who want to be here and play with purpose and passion… Sabres are only missing a couple pieces for a legit playoff run next season… 

Certain people are going to have a hard time letting go of the "Sabres Suck" narrative. Same kind of people ragging on Josh Allen even while he's tearing up the NFL.

[triumph_communes]

Toronto 82% attendance eh