My Lowest Point of Sabres Fandom

[MattPie]

On 8/31/2025 at 7:19 PM, spndnchz said:

Mine would be a game when I was younger with my Father. We lost. I was like “wait? We don’t play anymore?”

I remember that visceral feeling when I was little too. Boston, playoffs, checking: 1983, almost sure.

I remember thinking there were a bunch on people on the ice, and there they are.

But that's unlikely as low as now.

[dudacek]

25 minutes ago, LabattBlue said:

If this isn’t the low point of your fandom, then when was it?

You’re not asking me, but I can think of 2 candidates:

the most recent was the Krueger bubble fiasco when they lost 18 in a row and a team with Eichel, Reinhart, Hall, Skinner, Dahlin, Montour literally could not score and looked like they may never score again.
 

We started something like 6/26/5 The tank had clearly and unequivocally failed and we were no closer to the playoffs than we were when we were losing on purpose. Every player clearly wanted out as fast as possible and Krueger had nothing but empty platitudes. Utterly painful to watch.

The second was the 1986/87 team. I was a teenager who had been drinking the Bowman koolaid for years; the 80 points the previous year was a mirage; there was no way Scotty and all his high picks wasn’t going to bounce back.

We went 1/7/2 to start the year, Perreault couldn’t take it and retired and a roster loaded with has-beens like Clark Gillies and Wilf Paiement went on to finish dead last. I was crushed.

It was a real wake up call and the end of innocence for my fandom. The Sabres had never been bad in my experience and I don’t know if I ever considered the possibility that they could be.

Edited 23 hours ago by dudacek

[Thorny]

8 hours ago, dudacek said:

You’re not asking me, but I can think of 2 candidates:

the most recent was the Krueger bubble fiasco when they lost 18 in a row and a team with Eichel, Reinhart, Hall, Skinner, Dahlin, Montour literally could not score and looked like they may never score again.
 

We started something like 6/26/5 The tank had clearly and unequivocally failed and we were no closer to the playoffs than we were when we were losing on purpose. Every player clearly wanted out as fast as possible and Krueger had nothing but empty platitudes. Utterly painful to watch.

The second was the 1986/87 team. I was a teenager who had been drinking the Bowman koolaid for years; the 80 points the previous year was a mirage; there was no way Scotty and all his high picks wasn’t going to bounce back.

We went 1/7/2 to start the year, Perreault couldn’t take it and retired and a roster loaded with has-beens like Clark Gillies and Wilf Paiement went on to finish dead last. I was crushed.

It was a real wake up call and the end of innocence for my fandom. The Sabres had never been bad in my experience and I don’t know if I ever considered the possibility that they could be.

You didn’t ask me, but I can think of 2 comments on this: 

So in general your outlook on the team has improved since Adams instituted his rebuild plan -

you feel better after 5 FURTHER years of unequivocal failure - somehow the same ownership that’s still in place now seems *more* likely to succeed after stacking 5 years of failure on top of 9 - these 5 years have allowed them to gain ground for you.

As for the latter, to each their own but finding out my team could be bad once definitely didn’t feel bad as actually being bad for 2 decades

as I said, to each their own 

- - - 

Bear with me here but I honestly struggle to classify this as intellectual honesty. 5 years ago you feared the Pegula Sabres would be hard pressed to make the playoffs, and now after that being proven true, and no end to the regime in sight, no indication they’ve changed their modus operandi that got them to your “lowest point”, now 5 years on you feel better about it? They’ve only doubled down on every mistake since and continue to do so…

no team ever actually is or needs to be “5 years away” from the playoffs - the only reason that ever is the case is because of poor aptitude and choices - the fact we are suffering from both has only been proven *demonstrably more true* over the course of the last 5 years. We were one year away in 2021. We chose to be more than that, and those who made the choice are still here 

Edited 15 hours ago by Thorny

[7+6=13]

7 hours ago, LabattBlue said:

If this isn’t the low point of your fandom, then when was it?

I'd say the 2018 off season when O'Reilly said the team I love destroyed his love for Hockey.  I remember it just being awful to hear that.  

The trading Eichel off season.

The historic losing streak 20-21.  

Losing streak last year sucked.

Not improving on the '23 91 pts.

Definitely not now.  I don't think we suck.

[Weave]

9 minutes ago, 7+6=13 said:

 

Definitely not now.  I don't think we suck.

[Thorny]

Seems to come down a lot to how it’s being defined. “What was the point at which you felt they were least likely to succeed in the coming season?” seems to be an interpretation of choice 

That’s the high minded, desirable approach I think…it’s aspirational. “Past is the past”. It’s rather salient 

- - - 

I wish I came down there. To me, it’s not about the likelihood of success in the immediate season, now, straight up - it’s about the fact I’m truly scared im not going to care about it when it does happen 

That’s why it’s the low point: the fear of the apathy they have and may have caused.
 

I expect losing.
 

I fear winning 

Edited 15 hours ago by Thorny

[dudacek]

I’m not sure how one can be intellectually dishonest answering what seems to me a purely emotional question. 🤷

[Thorny]

9 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I’m not sure how one can be intellectually dishonest answering what seems to me a purely emotional question. 🤷

I lie to myself all the time 

it’s specifically human 

not saying you are but it’s certainly not a wild hypothetical. In the absence of a stance that seems inherently logical I’m going to question it. 💁🏻‍♂️
 

I think that’s fair, in an open forum where I’m also questioning the salience of my own position 

- - - 

It’s also the only relevant thread in a month I’m not afraid to step on a few toes in the name of a more lively discussion 

Edited 15 hours ago by Thorny

[Thorny]

Maybe a better thread would honestly be whether this is closer to the bottom 10 moments, or the top 10 moments. There does seem to be a lot of active and manual polarization. 

[dudacek]

13 hours ago, Thorny said:

I lie to myself all the time 

it’s specifically human 

not saying you are but it’s certainly not a wild hypothetical. In the absence of a stance that seems inherently logical I’m going to question it. 💁🏻‍♂️
 

I think that’s fair, in an open forum where I’m also questioning the salience of my own position 

- - - 

It’s also the only relevant thread in a month I’m not afraid to step on a few toes in the name of a more lively discussion 

So the logic should go something like this?

1. Success is defined as making the playoffs

2. The longer you go without making the playoffs the lower things get

3. The Pegula/Adams combo offers no reason to believe things are going to change 

Therefore it’s logical that this is the lowest point?

Edited 2 hours ago by dudacek

[Thorny]

22 minutes ago, dudacek said:

So the logic should go something like this?

1. Success is defined as making the playoffs

2. The longer you go without making the playoffs the lower things get

3. The Pegula/Adams combo offers no reason to believe things are going to change 

Therefore it’s logical that this is the lowest point?

Not necessarily, the way you explained it just didn’t make very much sense to me. What you feared needed not be the case and it only was because of the people in charge - and they are still here, 5 years later, while not having deviated from their modus operandi 

Others have explained their stance in a way that makes sense to me even if I don’t share the opinion - I didn’t understand yours 

it’s not a matter of right and wrong - it’s a matter of me being legitimately confused and asking if you could explain it in a way that illuminated my thinking 

- - -

I do think that, for me, your layout above is fairly close.

As mentioned, for me, the lowest point is most akin to being the furthest from your last drink in the desert. That’s when your body and mind feel it the most, and it’s when the solution (a drink of water, finally) becomes ever more likely to be “too little too late” for a barren corpse 

we aren’t “closer to the finish line” cause as mentioned: it’s only, ever been a year away, for a decade. A year away with competence. It’s the continued lack of competence that’s troubling 

*the hurdle has never been high.*. The particular struggle with the sabres drought has ALWAYS been our inability to clear a *low* hurdle. We’ve never needed a 5 year plan. No team does. 

Edited 1 hour ago by Thorny

[LGR4GM]

If Rasmus Dahlin leaves, that's the lowest point... we're here:

[dudacek]

Personally, my premises would be different:

1. Success is defined by how much entertainment (good feeling?) the team generates.

That is predominantly fuelled by wins and losses, but also influenced by things like the when and how of those wins and losses, the play of individual players, off-ice news and moves, and interactions with other fans.

2. The further away success feels the lower things get.

This isn’t a looking back to my last hit thing. The future and the past matter, but the most important element here is the present.

3. Every season (really, every game) offers a new set of circumstances and a chance at a different outcome.

The Sabres are bigger than Adams and Pegula.

Edited 1 hour ago by dudacek

[Thorny]

2 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Personally, my premises would be different:

1. Success is defined by how much entertainment the team generates.

That is predominantly fuelled by wins and losses, but also influenced by things like the when and how of those wins and losses, the play of individual players, off-ice news and moves, and interactions with other fans.

2. The further away success feels the lower things get.

This isn’t a looking back to my last hit thing. The future than the past matter, but the most important element here is the present.

3. Every season (really, every game) offers a new set of circumstances and a chance at a different outcome.

The Sabres are bigger than Adams and Pegula.

The Sabres certainly haven’t advanced beyond his shadow while he’s been here so until I see otherwise I can’t agree 

[Thorny]

The Sabres are the fans. That’s what I always say. We are the sabres. And WE have shrunk to a smaller entity than I’ve ever seen, under Pegula, and it shrinks by the year 

How could it not be the lowest point if the fanbase has been eaten away at, literally? Looking at it from only one’s personal perspective and mood is myopic. The base is at its weakest right now - not sure that’s arguable: regardless of what any one person tells themselves. That’s why it’s the lowest point: because most people will tell you that 

I’m not prophesying impending doom. I’m just listing to the chorus 

Edited 1 hour ago by Thorny

[Weave]

For me, the lowest point has been an ongoing saga.  My interest is basically at the bottom of a reverse plateau.  That depth was hit quite some time ago.  I can’t really define when the bottom of the trench was reached, but my god its been a long damn trench to trudge through.  
 

Furthest point from the last drink of water resonates with me however.