Radar

Okay. That's why I qualified my remarks NHL head coaching experience. Look I never endorsed hiring or not hiring any one. I think my posts were objective comments but seem to have been met by an assumption I'm advocating Martin. I'm not.

Experienced, contended for Stanley cup? I'm not putting down Keefe. Just made the point that he's not experienced as a head coach but Martin is. Frankly I'd be okay with young guy like Keefe but I go back to the criteria we've speculated they will look for matches Martin more so than Keefe. Maybe their not looking for experience as a head NHL head coach but I was commenting based upon hearing those reports. Thanks, Dude. Personally I hate that description but since you chose to use it.......

Names of your choices with detailed reasons please?

You make good points.

Okay. Then give us the names you have in mind of the Stanley cup contending coach looking for the job.

Wrong about "no history of success". Older? Correct. 're-'re-'re-retread? Correct. Sounds like most former head coaches respected enough to have stayed in the business for a long period. The question is do you want new face or experienced? Both have their proponents and those opposed to them.

My earlier post was not to say I'm for or against his being hired. Simply saying he meets the criteria of what people have been talking about. Experience as head coach. Has, in spite of some posts, won and been even awarded as coach of year in his past I believe. Whether he's my choice or I'd prefer someone else is irrelevant to the fact he seems to check most boxes of what we're saying they will look for. By the way, when I posted questioning if Babcock is a great coach or a good coach I said you need to see the talent he's had to work with. When coaching talented teams Martin won a lot. Babcock won a lot but his playoff record is questionable. Record wise they've both been good coaches.

The guy has a lot of experience, won a lot. What criteria being discussed doesn't he meet?

Not leaping to him at all. Just saying that if ego is involved it could be anyone. Let's face it everyone has an ego and athletes certainly. If rumor is true I would not exclude anyone and if it's not one of our top guys you would think he would be gone as this same rumbling has been heard for a couple years it seems. I like Eichel and hope he's as respected by his teammates as their captain.

If this is true about players ego problems would one possibly be our captain? Boy, I hope not as we can't afford that. If that were the case I wouldn't think he'd be the captain. Hopefully this reporting is inaccurate which wouldn't be all that rare.

When with Sabres "Boogie Man" I believe.

While I may not want our owner dictating who the GM hires I'm sure most owners have some say. If I owned the team I would expect to. So, is the concern because it's this particular owner or do you think no owners should be involved? Most,not all, on this board seemed to approve of the Housley hire myself included. Now that it appears to have been a mistake we blame ownership and divorce ourselves from our initial approval of the hire.

And why do you wish this?......oh, never mind guess that's quite obvious.

Exactly my feelings.

Both Oh, I'm not saying they should not post. Just interesting how much they post and what the posts contain.

No you've been vetted and cleared.

Why is it remarkable? Read most any poll and you find plus/minus thirty or so percent disgruntled , unhappy people. Most seem to have no solutions but have a lot to say about problems. In my years of administration I found this true of employees as well.

Amazing how many posts on a Sabres forum are made by two of the most negative toward the franchise. That's not amazing I guess because that's true in most things.

Not nostalgic he actually has pretty much what most people think we're looking for. Do I think it would happen? No. Would I be against it? No. I never thought he deserved to get fired and he is better than anyone who has followed him.

Answer for Sabres problems........More Talent. Marv Levey is not in the Hall because he was a great coach but he had great players.

?

It was interesting listening to Peters today on the Instigators. He asked a question I've thought about. Is Babcock a great coach or has he had great talent. If he stayed in Detroit would they be much better? Or did he just get out before the decline and go to a team on the rise? I'm of the opinion Babcock is a very good coach but not as great as we may imagine. Sure he's a "big fish" but his name may be bigger than he is himself. Shanny also benefited by the talent around him in Denver. I think he's overrated.

GR had guy on who said this. Of course Simon immediately crossed AV off list. Rivet on Instigators seemed to pew,pew it. Said he liked him as coach.

My ignore list expands.

Get a life.