Eleven Posted October 25, 2013 Report Posted October 25, 2013 It's hard to really get on Darcy for the Leino signing. Chances are that Pegula forced him to make that move, or just told him to get SOMEBODY. And behind Richards, there wasn't much to be had. If Leino hadn't bamboozled him ("sure, I'll play center!"), I'd agree. But Leino bamboozled him.
Iron Crotch Posted October 25, 2013 Report Posted October 25, 2013 Pegula is the Daniel Snyder of the NHL. More money than God, but doesn't have any idea how to spend it. At least Snyder has the balls to fire guys when they don't produce.
Hoss Posted October 25, 2013 Report Posted October 25, 2013 Pegula is the Daniel Snyder of the NHL. More money than God, but doesn't have any idea how to spend it. At least Snyder has the balls to fire guys when they don't produce. The only thing missing is Pegula making our logo a picture of two Sabres cutting THROUGH a buffalo and then ignoring the obvious fact of how offensive it is and refusing to change it... (Well, maybe Snyder has changed his mind on that front)
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted October 25, 2013 Report Posted October 25, 2013 Thanks for that. It is interesting to consider all the possibilities here as we autopsy the corpse that is the Sabres franchise. Although I'm a Pegula Meddler Theorist, which almost by definition means I have to think Terry came in and he, himself, Terry, argued for retaining Lindy and Darcy without much input from his advisors, there's another possiblility. Terry was friends with Cliff Benson before buying the Sabres. They talked about what Terry would do with his fortune, and Terry said he wanted to buy the team. Cliff had connections with the Penguins. Enter Ted Black. Black was hired by Ken Sawyer, and so Ken comes along for the ride in the old boys network train. Terry, not having known the team was for sale, might not even have known who the freakin' general manager was. So maybe he got advice from his advisors — Cliff, Ted and Ken — that Darcy really is a good guy who hasn't done anything wrong and was handcuffed, and that remains the company line to this day. The big question here would be why those advisors would endorse Darcy so enthusiastically. Given that they're business guys — two accountants and a lawyer — perhaps Darcy made the most sense from a bottom line perspective. The bean counters had to be impressed by all those fannies in the seats, the waiting list, the merch sales, the ratings and so forth. Blaming the advisors? Not bad. If that's the case, we're waiting for Terry to wake up and fire the whole lot of them. It's actually the most optimistic theory out there. The rebuild won't be over until every player on the ice is a teenager.
Sherman Posted October 26, 2013 Report Posted October 26, 2013 Thanks for that. It is interesting to consider all the possibilities here as we autopsy the corpse that is the Sabres franchise. Although I'm a Pegula Meddler Theorist, which almost by definition means I have to think Terry came in and he, himself, Terry, argued for retaining Lindy and Darcy without much input from his advisors, there's another possiblility. Terry was friends with Cliff Benson before buying the Sabres. They talked about what Terry would do with his fortune, and Terry said he wanted to buy the team. Cliff had connections with the Penguins. Enter Ted Black. Black was hired by Ken Sawyer, and so Ken comes along for the ride in the old boys network train. Terry, not having known the team was for sale, might not even have known who the freakin' general manager was. So maybe he got advice from his advisors — Cliff, Ted and Ken — that Darcy really is a good guy who hasn't done anything wrong and was handcuffed, and that remains the company line to this day. The big question here would be why those advisors would endorse Darcy so enthusiastically. Given that they're business guys — two accountants and a lawyer — perhaps Darcy made the most sense from a bottom line perspective. The bean counters had to be impressed by all those fannies in the seats, the waiting list, the merch sales, the ratings and so forth. Blaming the advisors? Not bad. If that's the case, we're waiting for Terry to wake up and fire the whole lot of them. It's actually the most optimistic theory out there. I think it is on the advisors. He put them in charge. I also believe that Darcy can probably sell a pretty good story having survived in that position for 16 years. Pegula is a billionaire that runs several businesses. Most people in those positions don't micro manage they hire people, delegate and then hold them accountable after given a chance to prove themselves.
I am Defecting Posted November 2, 2013 Report Posted November 2, 2013 Biggest disappointment is that he has all the money in the world, but only cronies and draftees will work for him. He's got to overpay to keep the ones he has, and his money does nothing to bring new talent through the door. Remember being excited about free-agents? Get over it. Got any ideas for trades? You better factor in that no player wants to come here. Think we'll hire the next big thing at Coach or GM? Think again. They all want out. It's not the city, and it ain't the fans. It's the word on the street. The toxicity comes from one source, one directive. Are we all forgetting that he pronounced Stanley incorrectly. Makes perfect sense, though, that a guy from Carbondale, PA would be the worlds biggest Sabres fan. :sick: Gee, golly, where is Perreault?
Marvelo Posted November 2, 2013 Report Posted November 2, 2013 It's hard to take but Buffalo is a bush league organization. Since day one the Sabres have been built to compete and have been at best top grade doormats. We have had owners who have mostly stopped short when on the brink, or in Pegula's case, spent wildly with no brains. An organization like the Red Sox, as much as I despise them, can have a bad year but then bounce back to win a championship. That's because they have it in them as an organization to be able to put the right pieces together in different ways from year to year. Buffalo has no clue how to put together a championship team...we're too imbred with nepotism and Pegula is just the latest clueless owner. He might have a hard head for business but the man is a softie when it comes to surrounding himself with top hockey men who could make great decisions.
mrjsbu96 Posted November 2, 2013 Report Posted November 2, 2013 I likely will be accused of having my head in the sand but: he tried the Daniel Synder route and it failed. In realizing this he gave Darcy a second chance a la PITT, CHI - through a few years of high draft picks. There is something to be said in this day and age of not giving to instant gratification and firing everyone. It was a small minority to my memory that was upset about the initial Pegula spending binge which obviously didn't work out. I also can't overlook what he is doing for downtown Buffalo on his dime (and tax breaks). So, until this 2-3 years of drafting is complete, I will wait until I decide Terry was all-bad for Buffalo and the Sabres.
Guest Sloth Posted November 2, 2013 Report Posted November 2, 2013 Yep, worked for the Penguins and the Blackhawks, but they were able to fill in the other pieces. The Sabres are not guaranteed to land the the next possible Toews/Kane duo. And w/ Darcy running the show I do not see the right supportive players being added. Pens also had Mario, John LeClair, Mark Recchi, Ziggy Palffy, among others there as mentors for the kids. Who do we have? Vanek and Stafford? And you know by the time we do draft these top pick players, such as Reinhart, Vanek and Miller will be long gone. His mentors will be a bunch of proven losers. Not exactly what the Pens did. That was the point I was making. When I mentioned supportive players, I was referring to veterans being brought in to mentor the young players. In my opinion, Darcy will either bring in veterans not meant for that type of job or he will do next to nothing.
nfreeman Posted November 2, 2013 Report Posted November 2, 2013 Biggest disappointment is that he has all the money in the world, but only cronies and draftees will work for him. He's got to overpay to keep the ones he has, and his money does nothing to bring new talent through the door. Remember being excited about free-agents? Get over it. Got any ideas for trades? You better factor in that no player wants to come here. Think we'll hire the next big thing at Coach or GM? Think again. They all want out. It's not the city, and it ain't the fans. It's the word on the street. The toxicity comes from one source, one directive. Are we all forgetting that he pronounced Stanley incorrectly. Makes perfect sense, though, that a guy from Carbondale, PA would be the worlds biggest Sabres fan. :sick: Gee, golly, where is Perreault? I agree that good players won't want to join the worst team in the NHL, but any GM candidate would be thrilled to get a shot at this job -- and if a respected GM is hired, any coaching candidate will also be thrilled.
Stoner Posted November 2, 2013 Report Posted November 2, 2013 I agree that good players won't want to join the worst team in the NHL, but any GM candidate would be thrilled to get a shot at this job -- and if a respected GM is hired, any coaching candidate will also be thrilled. Well, at least one good player, Robyn Regehr, had to have his arm twisted to come, and that was before things got really bad. I think you'll have to go back before suckitude to find an explanation for Buffalo's recruiting problem. I likely will be accused of having my head in the sand but: he tried the Daniel Synder route and it failed. In realizing this he gave Darcy a second chance a la PITT, CHI - through a few years of high draft picks. There is something to be said in this day and age of not giving to instant gratification and firing everyone. It was a small minority to my memory that was upset about the initial Pegula spending binge which obviously didn't work out. I also can't overlook what he is doing for downtown Buffalo on his dime (and tax breaks). So, until this 2-3 years of drafting is complete, I will wait until I decide Terry was all-bad for Buffalo and the Sabres. Terry tried something, so Darcy gets a second chance? When was Darcy's first chance? Darcy has publicly criticized the 2011 offseason approach, which is odd if it was Darcy's approach. Whose idea is the complete teardown? If Darcy, I can almost accept it, because your GM is the one who's supposed to make that call.
Stoner Posted November 2, 2013 Report Posted November 2, 2013 Biggest disappointment is that he has all the money in the world, but only cronies and draftees will work for him. He's got to overpay to keep the ones he has, and his money does nothing to bring new talent through the door. Remember being excited about free-agents? Get over it. Got any ideas for trades? You better factor in that no player wants to come here. Think we'll hire the next big thing at Coach or GM? Think again. They all want out. It's not the city, and it ain't the fans. It's the word on the street. The toxicity comes from one source, one directive. Are we all forgetting that he pronounced Stanley incorrectly. Makes perfect sense, though, that a guy from Carbondale, PA would be the worlds biggest Sabres fan. :sick: Gee, golly, where is Perreault? You've gone to a dark place, my friend. The Stanley thing bugged me, but not nearly as much as Terry's admission about not knowing the team was for sale. Most of us have beloved pets. How many of us don't remember the time they were run over by a car and rushed to the vet? How to characterize Terry? I think he's a lightweight hockey fan who probably liked the Flyers when he was younger, then latched onto the Sabres when they were good in the 70s and he lived in Olean. As the business grew over the years, he checked out mentally while maintaining some interest in the team (where I'm at with the Bills). If the Penguins or Flyers had been for sale in 2010, he would have bought them and cried at the sight of Mario or Bobby Clarke. Selling Terry as Superfan was smart, and most people bought it.
Marvelo Posted November 2, 2013 Report Posted November 2, 2013 If Uncle Terry would've fired Ruff and Regier the very first day of his ownership, he would've been a Buffalo legend.
Stoner Posted November 2, 2013 Report Posted November 2, 2013 This thread is weird. There are no weird threads, only weird posters. It's OK. This isn't for everyone. Some people saw Terry and immediately liked the guy and believed in him. He's one of us, they figured, and he's filthy rich. He's "Mr." Pegula to them. Respect. He must be smart. He knows what he's doing. He knows hockey, somehow. And these people will never be swayed in their opinion. Others question everything. Wasn't that your sig? I have this feeling, call it weird if you want, that when Terry's time is done here, we're going to sit back and say, "What the ###### was that all about?!" If Uncle Terry would've fired Ruff and Regier the very first day of his ownership, he would've been a Buffalo legend. That whole lead-up time to actually seeing Terry (November to February?) provided plenty of time to daydream about the guy. I was proud that a fellow Pennsylvania was buying the team. All the oil and gas guys I've known or seen have been, you know, ######-kickers. Manly men. Tell ya where to hang it. Plain spoken. Men of action. Big, burly men with great arms and… OK, well, anyway. I envisioned Terry pulling up to the arena on day one in a pickup, coming into the presser in jeans and boots and saying, "Get off my hockey team" to the whole bunch of hangers-on, the core included. Blowing the stink off the place and even calling out Chet and Muffy. Sitting in the crowd like the Knoxes. The image was officially destroyed when they showed Terry sipping wine in a suite, undisturbed by the fact the Sabres had just scored a big goal in a mad dash for the playoffs.
Marvelo Posted November 3, 2013 Report Posted November 3, 2013 Crapula. Whatever he touches turns to crap.
Stoner Posted November 3, 2013 Report Posted November 3, 2013 I like Vogl in Gleason's NHL column slot on Sunday. Vogl has strong opinions, who knew? Today's is that Terry's money has meant nothing to this franchise, and in fact has driven it into a ditch. My own take is that Terry is the guy in your town who wins $5 million in the lottery and ends up in prison when his new house burns down a year later, killing some junkies.
mrm33064 Posted November 3, 2013 Report Posted November 3, 2013 Organizations tend to take on the personality of their leadership. While Pegula seems to get a lot of things right - I like Black, I like the loyalty, I like the commitment to downtown - all those things are good but his absence as a real "presence" in the organization is not helping, especially when his on-the-ground "leaders" are guys like Darcy and Rolston. It's not that these guys all lack demonstrable "fire", it's not about yelling and screaming, t goes much deeper than that. It's the idea that somehow all this under-performance is expected and/or acceptable, as evidenced by the interviews, the comments in the media ("expect suffering" or whatnot), and so forth. The unwritten philosophy that it's OK to suck, because ... [insert excuse here: we're young, we're learning, we're rebuilding, etc.] Hearing that stuff in the media everyday is also not the way to motivate or establish a positive identity. It's also what's going to make Buffalo look like the complete opposite of "hockey heaven" to free agents or players thinking of waiving a no-trade provision. Buffalo is the place you don't want to go, absent being grossly overpaid. All of that stems from the top. The front office needs to be shaken up for all sorts of reasons, not the least of which is this dull, "we're rebuilding, so expect trouble" attitude and built-in excuse mentality that, let's admit, already sounds to most of US like Charlie Brown's teacher. Imagine what it sounds like on a day-in, day-out basis to the team. Changing leadership isn't going to immediately make an 18 year old turn into an all-star, but it will instill in him the kind of direction, expectation, and attitude that he will not only internalize, but better yet - he'll start requiring it from his teammates. And that attitude spreads. Then we'll be getting somewhere.
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted November 3, 2013 Report Posted November 3, 2013 Organizations tend to take on the personality of their leadership. While Pegula seems to get a lot of things right - I like Black, I like the loyalty, I like the commitment to downtown - all those things are good but his absence as a real "presence" in the organization is not helping, especially when his on-the-ground "leaders" are guys like Darcy and Rolston. It's not that these guys all lack demonstrable "fire", it's not about yelling and screaming, t goes much deeper than that. It's the idea that somehow all this under-performance is expected and/or acceptable, as evidenced by the interviews, the comments in the media ("expect suffering" or whatnot), and so forth. The unwritten philosophy that it's OK to suck, because ... [insert excuse here: we're young, we're learning, we're rebuilding, etc.] Hearing that stuff in the media everyday is also not the way to motivate or establish a positive identity. It's also what's going to make Buffalo look like the complete opposite of "hockey heaven" to free agents or players thinking of waiving a no-trade provision. Buffalo is the place you don't want to go, absent being grossly overpaid. All of that stems from the top. The front office needs to be shaken up for all sorts of reasons, not the least of which is this dull, "we're rebuilding, so expect trouble" attitude and built-in excuse mentality that, let's admit, already sounds to most of US like Charlie Brown's teacher. Imagine what it sounds like on a day-in, day-out basis to the team. Changing leadership isn't going to immediately make an 18 year old turn into an all-star, but it will instill in him the kind of direction, expectation, and attitude that he will not only internalize, but better yet - he'll start requiring it from his teammates. And that attitude spreads. Then we'll be getting somewhere. Well said. There was already a quote from Girgensons the other day about them being a pile of crap (his words, not mine), and that each person better figure it out quick or it's a horrible atmosphere that nobody wants to be around.
papazoid Posted November 3, 2013 Report Posted November 3, 2013 Pegula is NOT the problem. he has deep pockets, loves his team and turns the operations over to hockey people. my take is that Ted Black has decided the best way to build a championship is to blow this thing up and start from scratch. it may be painful but it is the right thing to do considering where we were and still are with this roster of under performers. i also believe that darcy will be fired BEFORE the upcoming draft. probably a week after the trade deadline, so that the purging of miller and vanek is on darcy and a new GM will take it from there. Rolston will be sent back to rochester and there will also be a new head coach.
LGR4GM Posted November 3, 2013 Report Posted November 3, 2013 Well said. There was already a quote from Girgensons the other day about them being a pile of crap (his words, not mine), and that each person better figure it out quick or it's a horrible atmosphere that nobody wants to be around. This isn't suffering this is full on implosion. How bad does it have to get before DR and RR and the rest of the management and coaching staff have to get fired? I mean at some point the atmosphere gets so toxic the only thing you can do is burn the house down. Well our house is a raging inferno at this point and Pegula's absence from this flaming cesspool of sh!t is astounding considering that the fire department of Darcy Regier let the last house burn down as well and started the fire this time!
bunomatic Posted November 3, 2013 Report Posted November 3, 2013 The thread title throws me off on this one. I think the fact that DR mentioned the national embarrassment of the Scott/Kaleta suspensions in his Kaleta/waived presser means the TPegs hasn't checked out and is feeling some sort of embarrassment for this trainwreck he's created. Hopefully it will reach a tipping point soon.
Marvelo Posted November 3, 2013 Report Posted November 3, 2013 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-KRrD_FIeY
I am Defecting Posted November 3, 2013 Report Posted November 3, 2013 Nice, 716. I didn't realize that Perreault was in the front row. I heard the conference on the radio. I was sitting on an overpass in Pennsylvania, because it was the only place I could get reception, and thought, Oh, Perreault must have been in some sort of crowd. How nice of Pegula to search him out in the crowd for special recognition. And the tears sounded so real on the radio. :35 Pegula points at and looks in the direction of "the old faces". Perreault is sitting in the front row. :41 Pegula hints that he can't even look at the old faces, because it causes such melancholia that it make him cry (not real tears). :45 Pegula looks in the direction of Perreault and other alumni for a good 3 seconds, not recognizing Perreault?, and asks, "Where's Perreault?" Did Perreault have to raise his hand or something in order to be recognized. That part's not on camera, but it's the part I don't understand. Was this a written statement, or was it a theatrical production?
Marvelo Posted November 3, 2013 Report Posted November 3, 2013 Nice, 716. I didn't realize that Perreault was in the front row. I heard the conference on the radio. I was sitting on an overpass in Pennsylvania, because it was the only place I could get reception, and thought, Oh, Perreault must have been in some sort of crowd. How nice of Pegula to search him out in the crowd for special recognition. And the tears sounded so real on the radio. :35 Pegula points at and looks in the direction of "the old faces". Perreault is sitting in the front row. :41 Pegula hints that he can't even look at the old faces, because it causes such melancholia that it make him cry (not real tears). :45 Pegula looks in the direction of Perreault and other alumni for a good 3 seconds, not recognizing Perreault?, and asks, "Where's Perreault?" Did Perreault have to raise his hand or something in order to be recognized. That part's not on camera, but it's the part I don't understand. Was this a written statement, or was it a theatrical production? Yeah, what a phoney.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.