If fans could fire an owner, would you fire Terry?

[#freejame]

Of the 20 who voted yes, how many would do so if no replacement owner was lined up? If it meant the NHL immediately took control and then sold to the highest bidder, regardless of intent to keep the team in Buffalo, would anyone actually vote yes? How many of the 20 just don’t like Terry? Most online polls have contrarians voting against the majority for fun. I don’t think this says much outside of there are Sabres fans who don’t think fully about consequences. 

 

[Claude_Verret]

A good synopsis of the statistical considerations when conducting a proper poll Liger. I had something similar drafted, but you did a better job.

Beyond these mathematical factors in polling you also have to consider the phrasing of the poll question. This is obviously a poor one, as its predicated on something that's from fantasy land (fans voting to fire owner) to result in something that's extremely unlikely (owner removed or selling franchise). 

A better set of questions paired with a true random sampling of Sabres fans that also parses out performance as owner of the hockey franchise from outside activities would be:

1. Do you approve or disapprove of TPs performance as owner of the Buffalo Sabres?

2. Since taking over as owner of the Buffalo Sabres do you approve or disapprove of the overall efforts that TP has made outside of his role of owner of the Sabres/Bills to impact Buffalo and WNY?

My guess is that question #1 would be much >50% of the fans disapproving of his performance,  because you know the team has sucked ***** for a long time. It would also be interesting to poll a random sampling of fans in other markets where their pro sports franchise has endured equal suckitude. I'd expect the results would be very unremarkably similar.

At the same time I'd guess that >90% would approve of activities outside of his role as sports franchise owner.

 

 

 

 

[Stoner]

Yeah, number 2's not loaded.

I wasn't trying to be Gallup. I know an owner can't be fired. It was an attempt to discern true opposition to Terry's ownership. You are right. Lots of people will disapprove of the job he's doing at a time like this. But to want him gone? That's a much better indicator of the degree of dissatisfaction.

Edited April 17, 2019 by PASabreFan

[Stoner]

1 hour ago, #freejame said:

Of the 20 who voted yes, how many would do so if no replacement owner was lined up? If it meant the NHL immediately took control and then sold to the highest bidder, regardless of intent to keep the team in Buffalo, would anyone actually vote yes? How many of the 20 just don’t like Terry? Most online polls have contrarians voting against the majority for fun. I don’t think this says much outside of there are Sabres fans who don’t think fully about consequences.

I put the stipulation in there so we could focus on Terry's performance as owner without a bunch of people saying, "Yeah, he sucks, but without him we don't have a team." Maybe a mistake to phrase it that way, but I'm not wringing my hands over it.

I don't think your scenario is realistic. The Buffalo market is important to the NHL. They could have moved the Sabres when Rigas got arrested. I don't see the league allowing the franchise to be moved. It's not like the decision is all up to the purchaser. I also assume that there are people out there who want to own a professional sports team, want to keep it where it is and want to win and have money to spend. I don't think these are pipe dreams.

[Claude_Verret]

Just because it's not a leading question doesnt make it a loaded one. In a random sampling of Sabres fans I'd wager that the vast majority are already aware of his role in Harbor Center and canal side and also that a vast majority are not already aware of things like wooing NYS officials at the arena on the benefits of fracking or that he donates regularly to republican political campaigns. If you want to give that information and ask them to see if it changes their answer it would be appropriate with a follow up poll question.

Edited April 17, 2019 by Claude_Verret

[nfreeman]

On 4/11/2019 at 7:24 PM, PASabreFan said:

There wasn't any bidding. Someone from Pegula's camp called LQ and LQ went down to the Burgh to have dinner with Terry et. al. Terry wanted to buy the team. It wasn't for sale. That said, somewhere along the line another party offered $70 million more than what Pegula paid, but with the intent to move the team. OSP said no. The second party was assumed to be Jim Balsillie.

 

1 hour ago, PASabreFan said:

I don't think your scenario is realistic. The Buffalo market is important to the NHL. They could have moved the Sabres when Rigas got arrested. I don't see the league allowing the franchise to be moved. It's not like the decision is all up to the purchaser. I also assume that there are people out there who want to own a professional sports team, want to keep it where it is and want to win and have money to spend. I don't think these are pipe dreams.

So -- which is it?  Did TG keep the team in Buffalo by turning down Balsillie and prohibiting TP from moving them?  Or is moving the team impossible because the NHL wouldn't allow it?

 

 

23 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

You know you've won the argument when people feel the need to start making stuff up about your position.

 

4 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

http://www.investigativepost.org/2013/02/08/pegula-of-sabres-pushed-for-hydrofacking-in-new-york/

Again -- which is it?  Are you claiming that you've never had a mistrusting axe to grind vs TP, or was he in it for the fracking all along?

 

[IKnowPhysics]

On 4/11/2019 at 12:42 PM, IKnowPhysics said:

trash thread

 

14 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

logic and reasoning

 

You know better.

[SwampD]

On 4/10/2019 at 9:29 PM, PASabreFan said:

The question is limited to Terry because it's been explained several times he's exclusively or almost exclusively involved in the hockey side of things while Kim handles the business. I'd like the question to assume a new owner would also be contractually obligated to keep the Sabres in Buffalo. In other words, a strict referendum on how he's handled the team.

Not for nothing, but this is pretty clear. The question removes all of PA's previous axe grinding and mistrust issues, and boils it down soley to TP's handling of the Sabres.

Seems like there are plenty of axes around that are dull.

[Stoner]

44 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Again -- which is it?  Are you claiming that you've never had a mistrusting axe to grind vs TP, or was he in it for the fracking all along?

Why are you threatened by questions and information? I created a poll and posted a link. It's not my axe to grind. I've hardly said two words about fracking — except as a description for how Housley screwed up the PP. Terry probably had multiple motivations for buying the team. It's much to simplistic to say it was all about owning his beloved team. I've come around to the notion that his primary motivation was setting himself up to buy the Bills.

[SwampD]

And did I really read somewhere upthread that 8 years isn't enough time to judge an owner,... because there was a Tank in there,... that may even have been at the insistence of said owner,.. and most likely the reason that the guy who turned suffering into patience walked? Good lord, we're doomed.

Edited April 17, 2019 by SwampD

[nfreeman]

20 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

Why are you threatened by questions and information? I created a poll and posted a link. It's not my axe to grind. I've hardly said two words about fracking — except as a description for how Housley screwed up the PP. Terry probably had multiple motivations for buying the team. It's much to simplistic to say it was all about owning his beloved team. I've come around to the notion that his primary motivation was setting himself up to buy the Bills.

You created the latest in a string of your TP-axe-grinding threads, which I've reacted to by describing it as such and pointing out conflicts in your statements in this thread, as well as Orwellian misinformation such as claims that a 75-25 deficit in the poll constitutes a win for your position and that you have no axe to grind.

You are of course welcome to your opinions, which appear to be shared by 28% of respondents here.  But I think I am free to disagree.

23 minutes ago, SwampD said:

And did I really read somewhere upthread that 8 years isn't enough time to judge an owner,... because there was a Tank in there,... that may even have been at the insistence of said owner,.. and most likely the reason that the guy who turned suffering into patience walked? Good lord, we're doomed.

What does this mean?

[Radar]

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.

[That Aud Smell]

1 hour ago, nfreeman said:

Again -- which is it?  Are you claiming that you've never had a mistrusting axe to grind vs TP, or was he in it for the fracking all along?

This confused/confuses me.

53 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

Why are you threatened by questions and information? I created a poll and posted a link. It's not my axe to grind. I've hardly said two words about fracking — except as a description for how Housley screwed up the PP. Terry probably had multiple motivations for buying the team. It's much to simplistic to say it was all about owning his beloved team. I've come around to the notion that his primary motivation was setting himself up to buy the Bills.

Indubitably. 

25 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

You created the latest in a string of your TP-axe-grinding threads, which I've reacted to by describing it as such and pointing out conflicts in your statements in this thread, as well as Orwellian misinformation such as claims that a 75-25 deficit in the poll constitutes a win for your position and that you have no axe to grind.

He called it remarkable. For my part, I didn't take that as declaring a win. (I also disagreed with his view of the matter.)

[Radar]

16 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

 

He called it remarkable. For my part, I didn't take that as declaring a win. (I also disagreed with his view of the matter.)

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.

Edited April 17, 2019 by Radar

[IKnowPhysics]

34 minutes ago, Radar said:

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.

Message boards allow pretty much any content to propagate (and the visibility of that content is enhanced by constant posting), up to the point active moderation occurs.  Other platforms with user vote-based visibility would likely crush trolls like this.  Incidentally, this is a downside of only enabling positive reactions on this message board, although content visibility would be unaffected: unless mods get involved, trolls don't get discouraged easily without lengthy arguments from many users, if at all.

[nfreeman]

52 minutes ago, Radar said:

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.

Me?

[inkman]

1 hour ago, PASabreFan said:

Why are you threatened by questions and information? I created a poll and posted a link. It's not my axe to grind. I've hardly said two words about fracking — except as a description for how Housley screwed up the PP. Terry probably had multiple motivations for buying the team. It's much to simplistic to say it was all about owning his beloved team. I've come around to the notion that his primary motivation was setting himself up to buy the Bills.

I'd have a lot more respect for the man if that's the case. Every sentence out of his mouth does the opposite of inspire confidence. 

I'd also like to put to bed the notion that because he's a billionaire he must know what's he's doing trope. 

Most of the super rich people I know, gained their wealth two ways. Right place, right time or propping themselves on the shoulders of smart hard-working people. It's the exception, not the rule, that rich people are smart. Lost of shysters in the ranks. 

[That Aud Smell]

36 minutes ago, Radar said:

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.

Well, you'd have to ask @PASabreFan why he found the number remarkable.

For my part, I thought it was remarkable for being so low -- I'd thought the number would be closer to 50%

[Stoner]

1 hour ago, That Aud Smell said:

Well, you'd have to ask @PASabreFan why he found the number remarkable.

For my part, I thought it was remarkable for being so low -- I'd thought the number would be closer to 50%

It's kind of the difference between saying you disapprove of the job a president is doing and saying you want the president removed from office.

[SwampD]

2 hours ago, nfreeman said:

What does this mean?

I think that eight years is long enough to judge an owner. You say it isn't because there was a Tank dropped in there, but it was the owner himself who made the it happen and is most likely what made Pat LaFontaine quit.

[Radar]

1 hour ago, nfreeman said:

Me?

No you've been vetted and cleared.

[Radar]

36 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

It's kind of the difference between saying you disapprove of the job a president is doing and saying you want the president removed from office.

Both

 

2 hours ago, IKnowPhysics said:

Message boards allow pretty much any content to propagate (and the visibility of that content is enhanced by constant posting), up to the point active moderation occurs.  Other platforms with user vote-based visibility would likely crush trolls like this.  Incidentally, this is a downside of only enabling positive reactions on this message board, although content visibility would be unaffected: unless mods get involved, trolls don't get discouraged easily without lengthy arguments from many users, if at all.

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

[MattPie]

On 4/13/2019 at 11:31 PM, PASabreFan said:

We're up to almost 26% of a decent sample size of hardcore fans who would fire the owner if they could. That's pretty remarkable.

Catching up on this thread. As a (related?) fact, 27% of Americans believe the Sun revolves around the Earth.

https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2018/nsb20181/report/sections/science-and-technology-public-attitudes-and-understanding/public-knowledge-about-s-t

(table 7.1)

[That Aud Smell]

1 hour ago, SwampD said:

I think that eight years is long enough to judge an owner. You say it isn't because there was a Tank dropped in there, but it was the owner himself who made the it happen and is most likely what made Pat LaFontaine quit.

Is this anything more than message board speculation? It’s fine, if not. I can’t recall having heard this theory.

[Weave]

49 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

Is this anything more than message board speculation? It’s fine, if not. I can’t recall having heard this theory.

That theory was talked about here and in print at the time.  Then again, so was the theory that LaLa was prone to angry outbursts.