The Buffalo News' Agenda: Get Regier and Ruff Fired

[shrader]

See: Sather, Glen. You know, the guy who put together the 1 seed in the East and many people's pick to win the Cup this year.

 

Trotz and Poille in Nashville. Two playoff series victories over their entire tenure (13 years).

[TrueBlueGED]

Oh, I think I know him. If I remember correctly, he's the guy who replaced his coach mid-season a few years back.

 

Point is, people like to lament the fact that nowhere else would a team be in place for a long period of time without a lot of success, but that is patently false. To go with my Sather example....the Rangers missed the playoffs his first 4 years on the job...in NYC! That's like missing the playoffs 10 straight years in Buffalo. And he still has a job. And he still managed to build a contending team. Jeff Fisher in Tennessee, Mike Shanahan post-Elway in Denver, George Karl in Denver (NBA), Bill Cowher in Pittsburgh. I could go on.

 

More often than not, yes, a coach/GM will be fired after 5 years of little success. But there are a good number of examples where that doesn't happen, and a good number of those end up being success stories. I'm not about to predict that Regier builds a championship-caliber team in the next 2 years because I'm still not sold on what his long-term vision is (or that he has one at all) for the team....but I'm also not going to sit here and pretend the Sabres are the only team in sports which has kept a management or coaching team in place despite a mediocre stretch, nor am I going to predict failure in perpetuity because of it.

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

Point is, people like to lament the fact that nowhere else would a team be in place for a long period of time without a lot of success, but that is patently false. To go with my Sather example....the Rangers missed the playoffs his first 4 years on the job...in NYC! That's like missing the playoffs 10 straight years in Buffalo. And he still has a job. And he still managed to build a contending team. Jeff Fisher in Tennessee, Mike Shanahan post-Elway in Denver, George Karl in Denver (NBA), Bill Cowher in Pittsburgh. I could go on.

 

More often than not, yes, a coach/GM will be fired after 5 years of little success. But there are a good number of examples where that doesn't happen, and a good number of those end up being success stories. I'm not about to predict that Regier builds a championship-caliber team in the next 2 years because I'm still not sold on what his long-term vision is (or that he has one at all) for the team....but I'm also not going to sit here and pretend the Sabres are the only team in sports which has kept a management or coaching team in place despite a mediocre stretch, nor am I going to predict failure in perpetuity because of it.

 

Sather coached and built Stanley Cup winners

Shannahan coached Super Bowl winners

Cowher advanced in the playoffs or had a bye 9 of 14 years and there were multiple GMs

 

Fischer......best example. Still hasn't done diddly but worked under multiple GMs

 

Karl...been fired 4 times and has gone to playoffs 8 of 8 in Denver

 

These are the extreme examples, and nowhere has the coach and GM been together with mediocre results for as long as Regier and Ruff. Nashville is the only example I can see. For every Bill Cowher, there are 100 Herm Edwards.

 

I was more than happy letting Ruff come back last year if there was change to the GM and players involved. After awhile, no matter how much you may like to separate them and their own merrits, Regier/Ruff/TheCore are like the Holy Trinity in these parts. They are all one and they are all individual. Pegula seems to worship them that way as well.

[Campy]

Sather coached and built Stanley Cup winners

Shannahan coached Super Bowl winners

Cowher advanced in the playoffs or had a bye 9 of 14 years and there were multiple GMs

 

Fischer......best example. Still hasn't done diddly but worked under multiple GMs

 

Karl...been fired 4 times and has gone to playoffs 8 of 8 in Denver

 

These are the extreme examples, and nowhere has the coach and GM been together with mediocre results for as long as Regier and Ruff. Nashville is the only example I can see. For every Bill Cowher, there are 100 Herm Edwards.

 

I was more than happy letting Ruff come back last year if there was change to the GM and players involved. After awhile, no matter how much you may like to separate them and their own merrits, Regier/Ruff/TheCore are like the Holy Trinity in these parts. They are all one and they are all individual. Pegula seems to worship them that way as well.

 

Isn't that contradicted by comments after the season (I've forgotten by whom, either Darcy or Black) that we can expect some changes to "the core" this offseason? I haven't always liked DR's moves, I do like how Lindy coaches, but they have produced a competitive club during some lean years and have earned the benefit of the doubt IMO

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

Isn't that contradicted by comments after the season (I've forgotten by whom, either Darcy or Black) that we can expect some changes to "the core" this offseason? I haven't always liked DR's moves, I do like how Lindy coaches, but they have produced a competitive club during some lean years and have earned the benefit of the doubt IMO

 

Ted Black also said the team was at "A Crossroads and some very difficult decisions need to be made", on December 31st.

 

It's almost assumed Roy will be gone at this point, but people have a funny way of forgiving over 6 months.

 

That has been more of a source of the frustration than anything the past 5 years. The circular arguement between Players/Coach/GM fault. It has gotten every single one of them off the hook. Just when you think the biggest cash outlay in the league on player salaries and the acquisition of Lieno, Ehrhoff, and Regehr is enough for a referendum......now we need a "re-do" because of injuries.

 

We shall see.

[Eleven]

The crossroads remark--I took that to mean that they had to decide whether to be buyers or sellers at the deadline, and they decided to be sellers and to exchange a piece. I'm not sure that he meant more, but if the team is willing to move Stafford and Roy, I'm all for it.

[darksabre]

The crossroads remark--I took that to mean that they had to decide whether to be buyers or sellers at the deadline, and they decided to be sellers and to exchange a piece. I'm not sure that he meant more, but if the team is willing to move Stafford and Roy, I'm all for it.

 

I think Roy leaving is almost a given at this point. The question is how much we get in return.

[SwampD]

Point is, people like to lament the fact that nowhere else would a team be in place for a long period of time without a lot of success, but that is patently false. To go with my Sather example....the Rangers missed the playoffs his first 4 years on the job...in NYC! That's like missing the playoffs 10 straight years in Buffalo. And he still has a job. And he still managed to build a contending team. Jeff Fisher in Tennessee, Mike Shanahan post-Elway in Denver, George Karl in Denver (NBA), Bill Cowher in Pittsburgh. I could go on.

 

More often than not, yes, a coach/GM will be fired after 5 years of little success. But there are a good number of examples where that doesn't happen, and a good number of those end up being success stories. I'm not about to predict that Regier builds a championship-caliber team in the next 2 years because I'm still not sold on what his long-term vision is (or that he has one at all) for the team....but I'm also not going to sit here and pretend the Sabres are the only team in sports which has kept a management or coaching team in place despite a mediocre stretch, nor am I going to predict failure in perpetuity because of it.

With all respect, i completely disagree. Four names across four sports is not "a good number".

 

Also, people who have multiple Stanley Cups in there past get a longer leash, and I would bet that had they not made the playoffs this year he would have been gone.

 

Now I'm really done because I know that They are here for at least the next two years and all this is moot until then.

[shrader]

So what does get these coaches their seemingly liftetime contracts anyway. If you look at the top four active coaches in terms of tenure you get:

-Greg Popovich (Spurs): multiple rings

-Lindy

-Trotz: 2 playoff series victories during his entire stay

-Andy Reid (Eagles): multiple playoffs games, one superbowl appearance

 

Then if you look at the names recently removed from that list you have:

-Tony LaRussa: two world series titles with the Cards, as well as his past history

-Jeff Fisher: already mentioned, one superbowl appearance

-Jerry Sloan (Jazz): no titles, one NBA title appearance... I don't watch baseketball so correct me if I'm wrong on that one

 

 

So there's not a whole lot of titles in that list yet these guys are holding their jobs. And a guy like LaRussa road his past success for years before he finally won something in St. Louis. If it's all about winning championships, why are these guys kept around?

[TrueBlueGED]

Sather coached and built Stanley Cup winners

Shannahan coached Super Bowl winners

Cowher advanced in the playoffs or had a bye 9 of 14 years and there were multiple GMs

 

Fischer......best example. Still hasn't done diddly but worked under multiple GMs

 

Karl...been fired 4 times and has gone to playoffs 8 of 8 in Denver

 

These are the extreme examples, and nowhere has the coach and GM been together with mediocre results for as long as Regier and Ruff. Nashville is the only example I can see. For every Bill Cowher, there are 100 Herm Edwards.

 

I was more than happy letting Ruff come back last year if there was change to the GM and players involved. After awhile, no matter how much you may like to separate them and their own merrits, Regier/Ruff/TheCore are like the Holy Trinity in these parts. They are all one and they are all individual. Pegula seems to worship them that way as well.

 

I'm confused, does past success matter, or does only recent years count? Or do only championships matter? I'm pretty confident if Cowher were here many would have called for his head before his Super Bowl win. I broke down the numbers elsewhere, but he and Ruff have had quite similar amounts of success if you look at the years before Cowher finally won it all (and seeing as it took him 13 years to do it, I think it's a decent comparison). If Regier and Ruff got fired today, and their replacements missed the playoffs 4 consecutive years, many would be calling for their heads regardless of what they did in their previous gigs. Shanahan has won squat without Elway...as a matter of fact, he's looked pretty inept since losing Elway. In the 10 years since Elway left, he made the playoffs 4 times and advanced beyond round 1 once. Yet he gets a pass, because in the past he won a couple championships...on the back of his players.

 

If only recent championships matter, then 95% of coaches should be fired. If championships in the past give guys a free pass, then we should just hire Keenan and give him a lifetime contract since he won a Cup before. What exactly is required for a guy to keep his job for a significant length of time?

 

 

With all respect, i completely disagree. Four names across four sports is not "a good number".

 

Also, people who have multiple Stanley Cups in there past get a longer leash, and I would bet that had they not made the playoffs this year he would have been gone.

 

Now I'm really done because I know that They are here for at least the next two years and all this is moot until then.

 

I didn't exactly research this, those were names off the top of my head. How far back does the leash go? Should Sather get a pass for his general failings with the Rangers just because he won some Cups in the 80s? And saying he would have been fired if they didn't make the playoffs this year...I bet he wouldn't have been, so there.

[Weave]

I think the biggest difference between the situations involving Sather and Ruff is that Slats proved he could be part of building a winner before he got to NY. In that scenario patience can be more readily justified.

 

Also, patience can be expected if there is continuous improvement, measurable and/or intangible.

 

In the case of our team mgt I think a successful argument can be made that there is not a record of improvement and certainly no past championships to show that management is capable of winning big. There are a couple of one year success stories but there is no record of sustained improvement. Given that, I think that a measure of impatience after 15 years is justified.

 

We can debate forever whether ownership was or was not the reason that Ruff and Regier haven't achieved larger success or sustained improvement, and both sides of that debate will have points bearing much merit. While 15 years without a period of sustained success or even a general upward trend in performance without changes in coach/GM may not be unique, it is certainly unusual. And most definitely not a path others have used to build championships.

 

Said with less energy expended, while new ownership and players moves can be enough for many to keep the faith in the coach/GM, their past performance really hasn't justified their long reign together.

[TrueBlueGED]

I think the biggest difference between the situations involving Sather and Ruff is that Slats proved he could be part of building a winner before he got to NY. In that scenario patience can be more readily justified.

 

Also, patience can be expected if there is continuous improvement, measurable and/or intangible.

 

In the case of our team mgt I think a successful argument can be made that there is not a record of improvement and certainly no past championships to show that management is capable of winning big. There are a couple of one year success stories but there is no record of sustained improvement. Given that, I think that a measure of impatience after 15 years is justified.

 

We can debate forever whether ownership was or was not the reason that Ruff and Regier haven't achieved larger success or sustained improvement, and both sides of that debate will have points bearing much merit. While 15 years without a period of sustained success or even a general upward trend in performance without changes in coach/GM may not be unique, it is certainly unusual. And most definitely not a path others have used to build championships.

 

Said with less energy expended, while new ownership and players moves can be enough for many to keep the faith in the coach/GM, their past performance really hasn't justified their long reign together.

 

Get outta here, I have no use for your reasonable perspective! :devil:

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

So what does get these coaches their seemingly liftetime contracts anyway. If you look at the top four active coaches in terms of tenure you get:

-Greg Popovich (Spurs): multiple rings

-Lindy

-Trotz: 2 playoff series victories during his entire stay

-Andy Reid (Eagles): multiple playoffs games, one superbowl appearance

 

Then if you look at the names recently removed from that list you have:

-Tony LaRussa: two world series titles with the Cards, as well as his past history

-Jeff Fisher: already mentioned, one superbowl appearance

-Jerry Sloan (Jazz): no titles, one NBA title appearance... I don't watch baseketball so correct me if I'm wrong on that one

 

 

So there's not a whole lot of titles in that list yet these guys are holding their jobs. And a guy like LaRussa road his past success for years before he finally won something in St. Louis. If it's all about winning championships, why are these guys kept around?

 

Ok....how many coaching changes were made in the NHL, NBA, NFL, and MLB since Ruff has been hired?

 

These people you mention are THE ONE PERCENTERS!!!

 

Whatever.....he's here, he's Grier, get used to it.

[bunomatic]

Ok....how many coaching changes were made in the NHL, NBA, NFL, and MLB since Ruff has been hired?

 

These people you mention are THE ONE PERCENTERS!!!

 

Whatever.....he's here, he's Grier, get used to it.

 

Thats the problem. You get used to it and it seems normal. Almost comfortable. Its enough to warm the heart. The thought of change is foreign. Weird. Perhaps a bit scary. But who would we get to replace him ? Who could do a better job ? There's no one else out there. Gosh, if we fire him he'll go elsewhere and win the cup. I can hardly stand the thought of it. But we'd have to change the nameplate on his door. Is anyone capable of scaling the ivory tower to toss him out ? He seems so big and strong. Almost like the foundation around here. He's like a father to the players. Certainly to the core. He's known these guys since they were kids. Geez I'm sure Darcy and Lindy know what the other is thinking. I bet they finish each others sentences. They're like an old married couple. When they are alone together they don't even have to talk. Hell, we've had them so long why don't we just keep them ?

[TrueBlueGED]

Thats the problem. You get used to it and it seems normal. Almost comfortable. Its enough to warm the heart. The thought of change is foreign. Weird. Perhaps a bit scary. But who would we get to replace him ? Who could do a better job ? There's no one else out there. Gosh, if we fire him he'll go elsewhere and win the cup. I can hardly stand the thought of it. But we'd have to change the nameplate on his door. Is anyone capable of scaling the ivory tower to toss him out ? He seems so big and strong. Almost like the foundation around here. He's like a father to the players. Certainly to the core. He's known these guys since they were kids. Geez I'm sure Darcy and Lindy know what the other is thinking. I bet they finish each others sentences. They're like an old married couple. When they are alone together they don't even have to talk. Hell, we've had them so long why don't we just keep them ?

 

Or...we're also Bills fans, and we see that recycling coaches every 3 years accomplishes absolutely jack without better players. I'm not married to Ruff, and I don't think he's so good as to be irreplaceable. I think he can win a Cup, just as a lot of other coaches can. My position is that coaching is overrated, and the roster needs to be better or else they won't succeed regardless of who is behind the bench.

[bunomatic]

Or...we're also Bills fans, and we see that recycling coaches every 3 years accomplishes absolutely jack without better players. I'm not married to Ruff, and I don't think he's so good as to be irreplaceable. I think he can win a Cup, just as a lot of other coaches can. My position is that coaching is overrated, and the roster needs to be better or else they won't succeed regardless of who is behind the bench.

 

Oh I agree the roster has to be better. Its my contention that Regier isn't the only man capable(or is he?) to get the job done. And I feel the same about Ruff. I'm married to neither but it sure feels like it sometimes. And rather than being afraid of the unknown when it comes to replacing these two I welcome it. They've both had enough time to prove to me at least, that they're not capable. As I've said before if they prove me wrong in the next couple of years I'll be the first to admit I was wrong and celebrate in the streets like everyone else. But I don't think they'll be around that long.

[drnkirishone]

Oh I agree the roster has to be better. Its my contention that Regier isn't the only man capable(or is he?) to get the job done. And I feel the same about Ruff. I'm married to neither but it sure feels like it sometimes. And rather than being afraid of the unknown when it comes to replacing these two I welcome it. They've both had enough time to prove to me at least, that they're not capable. As I've said before if they prove me wrong in the next couple of years I'll be the first to admit I was wrong and celebrate in the streets like everyone else. But I don't think they'll be around that long.

 

what if proving you wrong is they get fired, the Islanders hire them both and they win the cup 2 seasons later whilest the sabres go onto there 2nd set of GM/coaches the following season , well you be dancing in the streets still?

 

Please note I am not saying this to make the we can't get rid of them cause they might win it elsewhere argument. I simply saying this to be a smartass lol

[Weave]

what if proving you wrong is they get fired, the Islanders hire them both and they win the cup 2 seasons later whilest the sabres go onto there 2nd set of GM/coaches the following season , well you be dancing in the streets still?

 

Speaking only for myself of course...... who cares if they go on to win somewhere else? Scotty Bowman was hired to direct the Sabres to a Stanley Cup. He was shown to most definitely not be the right guy to do it in Buffalo and he was replaced. He went on to win 2 Cups with two more teams somewhere else. Who cares? He wasn't the right guy here. Just because he was the right guy under other (different) circumstances doesn't mean replacing him was the incorrect choice.

 

I'm not saying it is so, but it may very well be that Darcy and Lindy (or maybe just the combo of those two together) may not be the right guys to bring a Cup to this team with this mgt group. Retaining them because they *might* be the right guys for another team and mgt group does not make sense.

 

 

And yes, I know you were just tweakign someone else but this line of thought has come up in the past.

[deluca67]

Or...we're also Bills fans, and we see that recycling coaches every 3 years accomplishes absolutely jack without better players. I'm not married to Ruff, and I don't think he's so good as to be irreplaceable. I think he can win a Cup, just as a lot of other coaches can. My position is that coaching is overrated, and the roster needs to be better or else they won't succeed regardless of who is behind the bench.

"Recycling coaches every 3 years" and holding on to the Lindy Ruff for 15 years has resulted in the same amount of championships, ZERO!

 

In a discussion regarding Lindy Ruff, it's funny to see another example where Ruff's position is being devalued. The idea that the Sabres need to have so much talent that it becomes Ruff proof is hilarious. Can I borrow this straw?

[LastPommerFan]

With the exception of Bowman, I do think the head coach position is overvalued. This isn't football, where the coach has input to the actual action on the field of play on a regular basis. And this isn't Basketball, were you have only 6-7 players to get moving together. The GM/Scouting is critical, and the coach merely needs to be sufficient. Thus I am in a wishy-washy gray middle camp that doesn't care if Ruff stays or goes.

[shrader]

Ok....how many coaching changes were made in the NHL, NBA, NFL, and MLB since Ruff has been hired?

 

These people you mention are THE ONE PERCENTERS!!!

 

Whatever.....he's here, he's Grier, get used to it.

 

I'm not trying to say anything about Lindy at all here. I'm more thinking out loud about how these long term coaches stay in their position.

[bunomatic]

Speaking only for myself of course...... who cares if they go on to win somewhere else? Scotty Bowman was hired to direct the Sabres to a Stanley Cup. He was shown to most definitely not be the right guy to do it in Buffalo and he was replaced. He went on to win 2 Cups with two more teams somewhere else. Who cares? He wasn't the right guy here. Just because he was the right guy under other (different) circumstances doesn't mean replacing him was the incorrect choice.

 

I'm not saying it is so, but it may very well be that Darcy and Lindy (or maybe just the combo of those two together) may not be the right guys to bring a Cup to this team with this mgt group. Retaining them because they *might* be the right guys for another team and mgt group does not make sense.

 

 

And yes, I know you were just tweakign someone else but this line of thought has come up in the past.

 

Thanks Weave. Thats exactly what I was saying. You can't be afraid to move on. I could care less if Ruff went on to win 2 cups with another Team. Ditto with Regier. They've proven to me they aren't capable here.

[TrueBlueGED]

"Recycling coaches every 3 years" and holding on to the Lindy Ruff for 15 years has resulted in the same amount of championships, ZERO!

 

In a discussion regarding Lindy Ruff, it's funny to see another example where Ruff's position is being devalued. The idea that the Sabres need to have so much talent that it becomes Ruff proof is hilarious. Can I borrow this straw?

 

That isn't even remotely what I said. But go ahead, twist words to fit your crusade as per usual.

 

Edit: Oh, and I'll take the past 15 years of Sabres history over Bills history every single time. Championship? No. But to argue the two franchises' results are even slightly equivalent over the last 15 years is laughable.

[bunomatic]

That isn't even remotely what I said. But go ahead, twist words to fit your crusade as per usual.

 

Edit: Oh, and I'll take the past 15 years of Sabres history over Bills history every single time. Championship? No. But to argue the two franchises' results are even slightly equivalent over the last 15 years is laughable.

 

I've always found analogies between the two sports never mind the two teams hilarious. The only thing they have in common is they play in the same city and they've never won squat. People continue to use examples of Bills history to prove a point about the Sabres situation and vise versa. If you're talking about hockey find a hockey example with relevance. If you can't find one then there's no precedent . Don't look outside the sport.

[Kristian]

With the exception of Bowman, I do think the head coach position is overvalued. This isn't football, where the coach has input to the actual action on the field of play on a regular basis. And this isn't Basketball, were you have only 6-7 players to get moving together. The GM/Scouting is critical, and the coach merely needs to be sufficient. Thus I am in a wishy-washy gray middle camp that doesn't care if Ruff stays or goes.

 

I don't think I agree with this.

 

Hockey games can turn around in 2-3 shifts, simpy because the coach has access to his players non-stop throughout the game. The coach certainly has direct input, if he so chooses.

 

Soccer on the other hand, is something totally different, where the coach has half-time to make adjustments, and other than that he's limited to screaming at the closest guy from the sidelines.