JohnC

I agree with that! Either I am not being clear or there is a misinterpretation from my wording.

We are not reading each other correctly. I agree that the Cowboys want other teams, including smaller market teams, to make more money. They believe that some markets are not contributing enough to growing the revenue pie. But where I disagree with you is that the Cowboys don't want to share the money that they internally generate from their stadium and ancillary sources. They have a lot more ability to generate money from their stadium with the suites, merchandizing, sponsorships etc. than Buffalo has the potential to generate.

Of course the lesser revenue teams want more in the sharing of revenue. And of course the higher revenue teams want less sharing. That tension shouldn't be surprising between the richer and poorer markets. But my basic point is that even with the tension in the current sharing setup a small market team such as Buffalo within the current system has the ability to be very profitable. That's my basic point.

The issue isn't whether you are at the bottom of the totem pole as it is whether in your own financial stratosphere are you making a sizeable sum of money? With respect to the Pegulas and the Bills the answer is yes. With respect to Kraft and Jones who cares what they think. The system is designed for revenue sharing. It isn't equally distributed but it is distributed to the extent where every owner makes money or should be able to make money.

Let me be more precise. Most of the money coming from attendance goes to the home owner. Money from boxes or special seating, concessions stays with the home owner. When you look at the overall revenue pie the biggest portion of revenue for each owner doesn't come from attendance.

I realize that the request to have the stadium completely publicly funded was the first high bid stand. And from there it will be worked down. I just think that if the Pegula position would have been a lot lower, even as an opening stand, it would have been received more positively.

The majority of revenue comes from TV and other sources. That is shared revenue and should be going up. The revenue coming from attendance goes directly to the individual team. It is important but is not as prominent as other sources of revenue. I expect some public funding to a stadium project. I support it and have no problem with it. But a large proportion of the funding should be the responsibility of the main beneficiary. That is the Pegula Enterprise. Now the extended negotiations will begin over the ratio of costs.

The more I read about Jack's health status and the discussions about which surgeries are more suitable the greater the chance is that he will miss most of next season, if not all of it. With so much medical uncertainty I don't see teams willing to offer high end young players or prospects. I'm starting to believe that it might be best for the Sabres to wait for Jack to have the surgery and do his extensive rehab. I'm not sure he will play next year. The ideal situation for KA is to trade Jack and let the acquiring team deal with the medical issues. But the problem with that line of reasoning is what will be the return on a player with such a medical question mark? It's a big gamble for the trading team and the acquiring team.

Thanks for the effort. Your summary was very informative.

I don't know when Jack will get traded. No one does. What I do know is that the GM is not going to trade him until he gets what he considers a fair offer. That is what the GM has repeatedly stated. That's his stance. That can happen very soon or way down the line. I can't tell you what the timing is because I like everyone don't know.

Your preference is your preference. I am more than pleased that the Sabres took a forward instead of a goalie with their second pick. We have goalies in the pipeline. In addition, we got Levi in the Reinhart trade. So he should be added to the pipeline As far as ratings go you know very well know that different teams and different rating services use different metrics and make different judgments. Again, I am more than pleased with the players we took in this draft. We simply disagree that the Sabres should have used a high draft choice on a goalie in this draft.

This organization has a dearth of top line forwards in their system. You are entitled to your reasonable opinion. However, I respectfully but strenuously disagree with you and LGR on this issue.

I simply disagree with him. And as both of us noted acquiring a goalie prospect in a trade would have made the selection of a goalie an even more dubious decision.

Your suspicions are not well grounded. Everyone in the business knows what is going on.

With no hesitation I preferred the Sabres taking the Russian forward instead of the goaltender. The Sabres have some goalies in the pipeline that are not far away from moving up to the big league. And Levi should also be added to the mix. If the Sabres would have used their second pick on a goalie it would have been another disappointment laid on top of a mountain of disappointments. I thought overall our front office did a good job in this draft.

How is he hurting the process? The hockey world knows what is going on between him and the organization. And why is it so surprising that he is publicly expressing his frustrations? He has good reasons to be frustrated. It's not a secret in the hockey world that he wants out and that the organization wants to deal him. All that noise is atmospherics that has little influence on what is really influencing the trade market i.e. his present and future health status. And that is a complicated issue.

My eyes are blinking at full speed. Our pick was selected in the range where he was ranked. Maybe not for you but for me the Sabres made the right pick. Don't forget about Levi from the Reinhart trade.

Hell no! Acting out of frustration instead of calculation is simply dumb. If the GM bases his decisions on what the fan base wants rather than its judgments it should be summarily fired for gross incompetence.

Where the Sabres stand with prospects in the system it would have made littles sense for the Sabres to use a first round pick in either of our last two drafts. Also, because the Sabres were drafting so high in recent drafts the forwards who were drafted were rated higher than the goalie prospects. Sticking with the board made a lot of sense to me.

Why not just say WTF? 🤡

Thanks for the interpretation. Does the abbreviation stand for something?

What is ''''''Wut? I am very perplexed and feel out of touch with the lingo.

So what if Jack is frustrated or even if the organization is frustrated! If a fair-value deal can't be had at this time then wait until it is a better time. Why throw in the towel and get pennies on the dollar in a trade because of impatience. That makes no sense at all. It might come down to waiting for Jack to get a surgery and then rehabbing. If that is the case then so be it. The GM has made it clear that he is not going to make a bad deal for his best player. And that is the right thing to do. I understand why Jack is frustrated. But he is not making the deal----the GM is. The GM is obligated to act in the best interest of the franchise----not in the best interest of the player.

How do you know that he hasn't budged on what he is willing to accept in a Jack trade? Just maybe the offers he has received have not met the minimum level of what he is willing to accept? If that is the case then holding out is the right negotiating strategy. When you are holding the cards holding out could be the right approach to take. If his bottom line is that at a minimum a return has to include a young player who has the potential to become a first or second line center then he is acting with prudence. That's the right approach to take.

Some people might think that I have a big mouth on the Eichel issue. On the issue of having a big mouth I am a minor leaguer. 🤡 https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/31/us/record-mouth-gape-tiktok-trnd/index.html