SDS

After every single Sabres game you come here and discount the win by saying the only reason why the Sabres won is because the other team played like garbage. Beyond tiresome.

Quite frankly, it’s beyond absurd.

He was hooked around the stomach.

The only time I wouldn’t piss on Jeremy Roenick is if he was on fire.

This is flat out wrong. Do you really want to go through the list of veterans that have brought in over the last 12 years? Craig Rivet? Brian Gianta? Kyle Okposo? Jeff Skinner? Eric Johnson? Eric Staal? Ryan O’Reilly? Marcus Johansson? Taylor Hall? And a whole slew of others I’m not even going to bother to go through.

This is not as clever as you think it is.

Are you specifically talking about the scoring chances he had?

So you post garbage. Solicit opinions about that said garbage. Get told your opinion is garbage. And then make a report that someone’s calling your opinion garbage. 🙄 And this was the nicest thing I could say about the situation.

I am part of the some people who are talking about today’s game and not about the season. so, like I said… Some people.

Some people are posting about the game. You’re posting about the season. Those are different conversations.

I guess it just depends on the definition of bad. They lost on a fluke goal bad dominated the vast majority of the game, even killing off a couple of five V3. Is that bad? I guess it’s bad because you’re not winning. The corollary to that would be Dallas was good because they won. They were not good this game.

I guess you can say it’s bad when you don’t score. It’s hard to say they were freaking bad that game IMO.

apparently, he has nothing better to do than to mock my one post every two weeks.

How long are you going to try and be funny with this?

How many years will Kevyn need to be GM before he moves from an inexperienced GM to an experienced one?

Blame Lindy Ruff.

[This is an automated response] The topic title is potentially misleading. Accurate titles help the community find topics relevant to their interests and avoids reader frustration. Please change the topic title to more accurately reflect content of the original post.The topic starter can edit the topic title line to make it more appropriate. Thank you.

[This is an automated response] As a courtesy to the other board members, please use more descriptive topic titles. A better title will help the community find information faster and make your topic more likely to be read. The topic starter can edit the topic title line to make it more appropriate. Thank you.

Obviously I can’t make a strong case about results given where we are today, other than point out how much better last year was. It did happen. It was real. It did happen on his watch. Neither pointing out where we are today, nor averaging four seasons tell the complete story and you know that. Regardless, the topic is about whether he is serious about winning. I know you have massive disagreements with him and I’m not arguing those points. But just because you or anyone else disagrees with his approach, doesn’t mean he isn’t serious. He could be wrong. He could be incompetent. But as I said before, and you disagreed with, disparaging his intentions is just cheap shot fan straw-man fodder.

You know that’s not entirely fair when last year they were one point away from the playoffs. I’m not sure the consensus on the team was that we were going to take this large of a step backwards.

No. We’re going to keep this focused on your silliness. Please state the number of times in professional sports history that a commissioner has urged the selling of a franchise and under what circumstances that occurred. Compare and contrast that with the Sabres situation.

As frustrated as you may be as a fan, just how bad do you think this franchise is in the macroscopic view? Last year the team was one point away from making the playoffs. We’ve shut out Colorado, beaten the Bruins, Rangers, and Vegas. And your suggestion is that the league commissioner should convince an owner to sell the team? C’mon.

If I was off base, then you wouldn’t need to qualify the premise with “in the short term.” Kevyn himself has stated he’s building something for the long-term that may not be the best in the short term, whether you agree with this approach or not.