Ted Black and Sabres "mutually part ways"

[Jerry Jabber]

Brandon has done a great job of marketing the Bills as well as the business side of the team, but he was terrible when it came to hiring coaches, management, and players. Just as long as Brandon stays on the marketing/business side, then things will be good. 

[Swedesessed]

This is a dark day for the Sabres

[Doohicksie]

Does Russ shoot right or left?

 

He swings either way.

[SDS]

He swings either way.

 

I'm out there Jerry and I'm loving it!

[That Aud Smell]

I think it's worth noting though that Bucky's source is likely someone on the winning side of the power struggle -- and thus incentivized to smear TB on his way out the door.

 

Agreed. That business about Black not socializing with colleagues during the trip to Vegas? That seems like a bit of a gratuitous shot. If I were Black, and Brandon came along for a trip to the NHL awards? I'd have been uncomfortable, and likely not the life of the party.

[woods-racer]

Does this mean that Battista becomes VP of hockey operations?

My inference was that Bucky's source was talking about the disparate experiences of being behind the scenes of both organizations -- not the output of both or either. 

 

 

I'm no fan of Bucky, but this seems like a real honest to goodness source.

You're saying that TP doesn't care about who brought in more money, but it is a better work environment under RB?

 

 

TP wanted that work environment for the Sabres front office?

 

But it also doesn't hurt that RB is really good at bringing in corporate dollars and selling the logo?

 

So it's not even close to a mutual parting of ways?

 

If there is any one thing that happens from all this I'd like to hear Pat's side of the story.

[musichunch]

Bucky's source could be right. We don't know what's going on in the Sabres organization. Professional sports teams are like icebergs, we only see the top 10%. There could be lots of internal problems, missing deadlines, politics, etc. 

 

Also, I'm seeing here that Brandon could have too much on his plate. From what I've seen, when you get promoted and are given "higher" job responsibilities, the less you actually do. He'll have more people doing the dirty work and he'll be making the "larger" decisions. 

 

Imagine we had two presidents in the USA, each with their own responsibilities and one day it was announced that there would only be one. We would probably say he'll have too much on his plate, but the truth is he'll just have more subordinates doing the work he was doing previously.

Edited July 27, 2015 by musichunch

[That Aud Smell]

You're saying that TP doesn't care about who brought in more money, but it is a better work environment under RB?

 

 

TP wanted that work environment for the Sabres front office?

 

But it also doesn't hurt that RB is really good at bringing in corporate dollars and selling the logo?

 

So it's not even close to a mutual parting of ways?

 

If there is any one thing that happens from all this I'd like to hear Pat's side of the story.

 

I was saying that Gleason's source seemed to be talking about how the organizations were run, internally -- and that the Pegulas found Brandon's Bills to be a much better run business and that they apparently had concerns with how Black ran his division within PSE. That despite the fact that the Bills are, I presume, a (much?) larger operation than the Sabres. (Is that true? I have not tried to check.)

 

As for who's better at selling, developing, and leveraging, I'm sure that played into it as well.

 

Also: Pat who?

[Doohicksie]

I was saying that Gleason's source seemed to be talking about how the organizations were run, internally -- and that the Pegulas found Brandon's Bills to be a much better run business and that they apparently had concerns with how Black ran his division within PSE. That despite the fact that the Bills are, I presume, a (much?) larger operation than the Sabres. (Is that true? I have not tried to check.)

 

As for who's better at selling, developing, and leveraging, I'm sure that played into it as well.

 

Also: Pat who?

 

I was assuming PLF... maybe this has been brewing for a while?

[CallawaySabres]

He has ZERO say in players on either team so I'm totally fine with it. Now bring back the royal fckn blue you clowns and really bring the OneBuffalo to life...

[Hoss]

He has ZERO say in players on either team so I'm totally fine with it. Now bring back the royal fckn blue you clowns and really bring the OneBuffalo to life...

I don't think that he has zero say. I don't think anybody who is consistently in the room when decisions are made and interviews take place would have zero say.

As long as his influence is minimal on the actual hockey side of things it is fine. Russ is a likable guy. I'm not in love with all of his decisions, and a part of me still wants to just cut away all stench from Pre-Pegula Buffalo...

[That Aud Smell]

I was assuming PLF... maybe this has been brewing for a while?

 

That's the only Pat I could think of - but I don't see how he plays into this.

 

Then again, I didn't get the comment upthread about how it wasn't Black who was screaming at a TV and calling Babcock a liar.

[woods-racer]

I was assuming PLF... maybe this has been brewing for a while?

Yes.

 

I'm sure PLF gave an exit interview to TP and TB was not given high praise.

 

 

I was saying that Gleason's source seemed to be talking about how the organizations were run, internally -- and that the Pegulas found Brandon's Bills to be a much better run business and that they apparently had concerns with how Black ran his division within PSE. That despite the fact that the Bills are, I presume, a (much?) larger operation than the Sabres. (Is that true? I have not tried to check.)

 

As for who's better at selling, developing, and leveraging, I'm sure that played into it as well.

 

 

Also: Pat who?

First let me apologize. I should have started my post with "your opinion after reading Bucky's tweets are". I merged your post with another that had other information not from Bucky.

 

It is the most logical explanation, especially if PLF left a sour taste in TP mouth with regards to TB as a person to have to work with.

Edited July 27, 2015 by Woods-Racer

[...]

The corporate side of things is always top-down.  We don't need to go into detail on what that implies, right, I mean in terms of the corporate culture and its efficiency (or lack thereof)?

 

To expand upon SDS's statement, the Pegulas probably, and simply, liked what Brandon's corporate culture is like over Black's.  Pegula is a big on top-down management, he's outlined his preferences during public statements over time.

 

It could be a whole bunch of little things adding up to a whole: inefficiencies within the corporate structure, communication break downs, losing good hires, making poor hires, spending discrepancies (within reason, I'm not implying fraud).

[SDS]

The corporate side of things is always top-down.  We don't need to go into detail on what that implies, right, I mean in terms of the corporate culture and its efficiency (or lack thereof)?

 

To expand upon SDS's statement, the Pegulas probably, and simply, liked what Brandon's corporate culture is like over Black's.  Pegula is a big on top-down management, he's outlined his preferences during public statements over time.

 

It could be a whole bunch of little things adding up to a whole: inefficiencies within the corporate structure, communication break downs, losing good hires, making poor hires, spending discrepancies (within reason, I'm not implying fraud).

 

Eh. I thought it was the opposite - Pegula has stated his preference for a flat structure.

[spndnchz]

Eh. I thought it was the opposite - Pegula has stated his preference for a flat structure.

 

Coach and GM's of both teams report directly to Terry and Kim.

[...]

Eh. I thought it was the opposite - Pegula has stated his preference for a flat structure.

 

I took, or take, his statements to mean he prefers to hire "competent people" to mange, properly, the tier below them. Which implies a middle management tier. I don't know the internal structure, but there is no way a company that large, especially now, can operate effectively under the flat model.

I can see where Pegula might prefer a flat executive structure, but, again, way too large for that to work below the executive level.

[That Aud Smell]

I'm sure PLF gave an exit interview to TP and TB was not given high praise.

 

Ahhhh, gotcha. Gotcha. Interesting thought.

 

Pegula is a big on top-down management, he's outlined his preferences during public statements over time.

Eh. I thought it was the opposite - Pegula has stated his preference for a flat structure.

 

Correct. Lotsa people at the table - maybe one decision maker, but many people with a chance to give feedback. Multiple lines of open communication among multiple parties. No emphasis on clearly delineated lines of report.

Coach and GM's of both teams report directly to Terry and Kim.

 

I heard that about Rex. Same true for Bylsma? [sic?]

[...]

 

Correct. Lotsa people at the table - maybe one decision maker, but many people with a chance to give feedback. Multiple lines of open communication among multiple parties. No emphasis on clearly delineated lines of report.

 

 

At the executive level, sure, but, each executive has to have tiers below them.  Could you imagine Brandon having to deal with Juan on the nightshift of the custodial staff?  A flat structure would stall everything.

[darksabre]

At the executive level, sure, but, each executive has to have tiers below them. Could you imagine Brandon having to deal with Juan on the nightshift of the custodial staff? A flat structure would stall everything.

Duh. No one is suggesting what you're saying.

[That Aud Smell]

At the executive level, sure, but, each executive has to have tiers below them.  Could you imagine Brandon having to deal with Juan on the nightshift of the custodial staff?  A flat structure would stall everything.

 

That's what is meant by a flat structure. 

 

So, in an org chart, instead of maybe 2 or 3 people having a direct line of report to the top officer, you might see 6 or 8 or more lines of report to the top, with various lines going every which way, to indicate various cross-reports and an absence of complete hierarchy in some cases. 

[...]

So, what I'm suggesting, is that when it came for Black to have answers, solutions, strategies, and whatever else was being asked of him when they were all sitting at the executive table together, Black couldn't produce because of his management style.

 

Maybe ad buys were late, or they couldn't get the same kind of media discounts the Bills do.  Maybe when the Pegulas strolled the building, and had asked Black to address building and/or branding issues X, Y, and Z, Black was unable to meet the demands in the time needed in the way that they wanted them done.

[K-9]

Nationally. I have been told that at least three NFL teams approached TP after sale was complete to see if Brandon was available and that the NFL was also interested if he didn't remain with team.

He's very highly regarded in MLB circles as well.

[SDS]

Coach and GM's of both teams report directly to Terry and Kim.

 

Which points to what I was saying. It isn't player > coach > asst GM > GM > EVP > Pres > Owner.

[...]

That's what is meant by a flat structure. 

 

So, in an org chart, instead of maybe 2 or 3 people having a direct line of report to the top officer, you might see 6 or 8 or more lines of report to the top, with various lines going every which way, to indicate various cross-reports and an absence of complete hierarchy in some cases. 

 

I don't have an MBA, so I'm more than likely speaking beyond my ability to understand or express, but my understanding of a flat structure is the exact thing defined by Wikipedia:

 

"A flat organization (also known as horizontal organization or delayering) is an organization that has an organizational structure with few or no levels of middle management between staff and executives. The idea is that well-trained workers will be more productive when they are more directly involved in the decision making process, rather than closely supervised by many layers of management."

 

When I say top-down, apparently I should be saying hierarchal, which, as I have said earlier, simply must be the structure at Pegula Sports Entertainment.  Maybe my lack of a proper business education is at play here, but I don't see how PSE can function using a truly flat model.  Perhaps what you are saying is "flat" is actually a hybrid-flat, where the executive tier is wider than usual.

 

But, really, just posting some thoughts maybe showing my complete ignorance on the subject.  And I'm okay with that.  I hope y'all are, too.