mjd1001 Posted December 2 Report Posted December 2 10 minutes ago, steveoat87 said: This is shades of the Ralph Wilson syndrome. He would only hire people he new. You will never win with this philosophy. Hoping his kids can talk some sense into him. As is my main issue with Pegula, and why firing Adams likely won't change anything. In Football, there are more layers to separate him from the product on the field, in Hockey, Pegula wants to be involved, and he isn't going to hire someone who will tell him to 'butt out' of the hockey department. How can the team get better when you may need a new hockey department, but the one person who may be able to change that hockey department might be the single biggest problem with it?
JohnC Posted December 2 Report Posted December 2 1 minute ago, mjd1001 said: As is my main issue with Pegula, and why firing Adams likely won't change anything. In Football, there are more layers to separate him from the product on the field, in Hockey, Pegula wants to be involved, and he isn't going to hire someone who will tell him to 'butt out' of the hockey department. How can the team get better when you may need a new hockey department, but the one person who may be able to change that hockey department might be the single biggest problem with it? I don't see the owner interfering with the football operation. He hired quality people in McDermott and Beane resulting in resounding success. Why can't the same non-interference policy apply to the lagging hockey team? There is no problem keeping the owner informed about any considered or even impending transaction. He's signing the checks, so he has a right to know what is going on. The model and structure for success exists with his NFL franchise. The same reasoning should apply to the hockey franchise, at least that is how I see it. 1
mjd1001 Posted December 2 Report Posted December 2 (edited) 3 minutes ago, JohnC said: I don't see the owner interfering with the football operation. He hired quality people in McDermott and Beane resulting in resounding success. Why can't the same non-interference policy apply to the lagging hockey team? There is no problem keeping the owner informed about any considered or even impending transaction. He's signing the checks, so he has a right to know what is going on. The model and structure for success exists with his NFL franchise. The same reasoning should apply to the hockey franchise, at least that is how I see it. I agree with you 100%, there should be a 'non interference' policy with the Sabres also. But for some reason, he doesn't want that. Remember the last GM before Adams and why he got fired? There were direct quotes from both Terry and Kim saying they fired Botts because they felt "they weren't being listened to" in terms of hockey related decisions and they wanted more input. So yeah, you had a guy that came up with a different organization, bred to be a 'hockey guy', not a 'business guy', with experience with a winning team (Botts). Was he going to be a great GM? Well, he wasn't give much time but he was fired because the Pegula's had a different vision for the 'on ice' product and he wasn't receptive enough to them or made them feel 'heard' enough. Edited December 2 by mjd1001
Sabres Fan in NS Posted December 2 Report Posted December 2 Poll is closed, but not the thread. so ... YES !! 1
JohnC Posted December 2 Report Posted December 2 10 minutes ago, mjd1001 said: I agree with you 100%, there should be a 'non interference' policy with the Sabres also. But for some reason, he doesn't want that. Remember the last GM before Adams and why he got fired? There were direct quotes from both Terry and Kim saying they fired Botts because they felt "they weren't being listened to" in terms of hockey related decisions and they wanted more input. So yeah, you had a guy that came up with a different organization, bred to be a 'hockey guy', not a 'business guy', with experience with a winning team (Botts). Was he going to be a great GM? Well, he wasn't give much time but he was fired because the Pegula's had a different vision for the 'on ice' product and he wasn't receptive enough to them or made them feel 'heard' enough. The Botts situation was different. It was the covid era when economics of the business was upended. The owner whose hockey business and other hospitality businesses were hemorrhaging $$$ wanted an austerity program instituted where the scouting department and other staff were to be fired. The GM said no that he wasn't going along with the staff shredding approach. So he was fired. That's not the case now. For the most part, the current GM is making the hockey decisions. Does he have less $$$ to work with compared to other organizations? Probably so. But the GM is the person who is the most influential person by far in making personnel decisions. To put it mildly, he is less than stellar. 2
Pimlach Posted December 2 Report Posted December 2 1 hour ago, steveoat87 said: This is shades of the Ralph Wilson syndrome. He would only hire people he new. You will never win with this philosophy. Hoping his kids can talk some sense into him. True, but Ralph was in his late 90's when this happened. Terry has all his faculties, he just doesn't know were to turn.
steveoat87 Posted December 2 Report Posted December 2 51 minutes ago, Pimlach said: True, but Ralph was in his late 90's when this happened. Terry has all his faculties, he just doesn't know were to turn. True, but it seems that a person of his means would have no difficulty finding someone if he really wanted to. I have worked at a number of large successful corporations and when there was motivation, there was never any problem finding a consultant or outside individual to assess and advise on a problem. Terry just seems very stubborn and appears to have some vision of what he wants, but it is unrealistic given the way hockey is currently played (probably whey he liked Jeff Skinner). The best chance we have is if either Lindy (who probably carries some weight) or his kids, who probably have some interest in the business) can talk some sense into him. Adams is just a yes man who is clueless as to how to run an organization. 1
Weave Posted December 4 Report Posted December 4 This was the hole they could not dig. KA gonna need to pull a rabbit out of a hat now.
Carmel Corn Posted December 4 Report Posted December 4 11 minutes ago, Weave said: This was the hole they could not dig. KA gonna need to pull a rabbit out of a hat now. Yes….he could sign a rabbit or two to the roster….since they are much tougher and grittier to play against vs. any Sabres on this team! 🙃
JP51 Posted December 4 Report Posted December 4 On 11/24/2024 at 9:14 PM, PerreaultForever said: Zucker started really slow, like he didn't really want to be here. A disinterested mercenary. But then he started to come along and now he's one of those veteran leaders we've been missing all these years. I don't know what changed, but I don't think they'd be winning without him. Zucker will turn completely disinterested shortly if he already has not, he will see the lay of the land realize he is in purgatory and bid his time until he can either leave, or get traded to a playoff team for more draft picks at the deadline. On 11/24/2024 at 9:14 PM, PerreaultForever said: Zucker started really slow, like he didn't really want to be here. A disinterested mercenary. But then he started to come along and now he's one of those veteran leaders we've been missing all these years. I don't know what changed, but I don't think they'd be winning without him. Zucker will turn completely disinterested shortly if he already has not, he will see the lay of the land realize he is in purgatory and bid his time until he can either leave, or get traded to a playoff team for more draft picks at the deadline.
Carmel Corn Posted December 4 Report Posted December 4 16 minutes ago, DarthEbriate said: The Buffalo Sabres are no ordinary rabbit! They’re the adorable bunny inside the belly of a coyote. I want the rabbit from Monty Python’s Holy Grail instead!!!
DarthEbriate Posted December 4 Report Posted December 4 1 hour ago, Carmel Corn said: They’re the adorable bunny inside the belly of a coyote. I want the rabbit from Monty Python’s Holy Grail instead!!!
Thorner Posted December 4 Report Posted December 4 (edited) On 12/2/2024 at 2:28 PM, mjd1001 said: I agree with you 100%, there should be a 'non interference' policy with the Sabres also. But for some reason, he doesn't want that. Remember the last GM before Adams and why he got fired? There were direct quotes from both Terry and Kim saying they fired Botts because they felt "they weren't being listened to" in terms of hockey related decisions and they wanted more input. So yeah, you had a guy that came up with a different organization, bred to be a 'hockey guy', not a 'business guy', with experience with a winning team (Botts). Was he going to be a great GM? Well, he wasn't give much time but he was fired because the Pegula's had a different vision for the 'on ice' product and he wasn't receptive enough to them or made them feel 'heard' enough. We know what Botterill was fired for, explicitly: because he wouldn’t fire a bunch of people he stood up to Terry and got fired “Felt they weren’t being listened to”. Yes. “Fire those people.” ”No.” ”Ok, Kevyn, you do it.” Adams: Edited December 4 by Thorner 1
#freejame Posted December 4 Author Report Posted December 4 53 minutes ago, Thorner said: We know what Botterill was fired for, explicitly: because he wouldn’t fire a bunch of people he stood up to Terry and got fired “Felt they weren’t being listened to”. Yes. “Fire those people.” ”No.” ”Ok, Kevyn, you do it.” Adams: It’s interesting that Terry has never fired a GM for a teams performance on the ice. 1 2
DarthEbriate Posted December 4 Report Posted December 4 3 minutes ago, #freejame said: It’s interesting that Terry has never fired a GM for a teams performance on the ice. It's because it's not about the quality of the product. Incompetence is permitted as long as the people you employ say yes. It's how a loser runs a sports team. There are several NFL teams of old money that have been run this way by *failsons* for decades. If you're a leader, you're always evolving and innovating. You're pushing for excellence and you find the resources/training or remove the barriers to achieve it. You're demanding that your employees challenge you. You just reserve the final decision in the matter and take the blame if it goes awry.
JP51 Posted December 4 Report Posted December 4 18 minutes ago, #freejame said: It’s interesting that Terry has never fired a GM for a teams performance on the ice. Quite honestly I wonder with how bad this all is if he isnt simply afraid he wont get anyone to take this job externally or at least without a massive overpay.
Thorner Posted December 4 Report Posted December 4 23 minutes ago, #freejame said: It’s interesting that Terry has never fired a GM for a teams performance on the ice. Very interesting, thanks for pointing that out But, we may have to count Darcy under that category which is hilarious, because the only GM he fired for performance is the one that achieved the most on that front 1
#freejame Posted December 4 Author Report Posted December 4 2 minutes ago, Thorner said: Very interesting, thanks for pointing that out But, we may have to count Darcy under that category which is hilarious, because the only GM he fired for performance is the one that achieved the most on that front That’s a good call. Somehow in all of this I’ve forgotten all about him. Oh how I miss the simple days of being disappointed with Darcy. 1
Pimlach Posted December 4 Report Posted December 4 4 hours ago, JP51 said: Zucker will turn completely disinterested shortly if he already has not, he will see the lay of the land realize he is in purgatory and bid his time until he can either leave, or get traded to a playoff team for more draft picks at the deadline. Zucker looked good with Tage last night. He had a few excellent shifts in the 2nd period after we held off the Avs first surge. I was going to comment on the things he does well that do not get on the scoresheet. Anyhow, unless the team comes together and gets consistently competitive, he will be looking to move to a cup contender at the deadline. As such, he will most likely keep his game up. Expect to lose a good vet for more draft capital. 1
Pimlach Posted December 4 Report Posted December 4 2 minutes ago, #freejame said: That’s a good call. Somehow in all of this I’ve forgotten all about him. Oh how I miss the simple days of being disappointed with Darcy. We don't have Darcy Regier to kick around anymore.
PerreaultForever Posted December 4 Report Posted December 4 5 hours ago, JP51 said: Zucker will turn completely disinterested shortly if he already has not, he will see the lay of the land realize he is in purgatory and bid his time until he can either leave, or get traded to a playoff team for more draft picks at the deadline. Zucker will turn completely disinterested shortly if he already has not, he will see the lay of the land realize he is in purgatory and bid his time until he can either leave, or get traded to a playoff team for more draft picks at the deadline. I heard ya the first time 🙂 Zucker didn't come here to lead us out of the wilderness or to win a cup. Zucker came here because he's an aging veteran and we paid him a lot more than he was going to get anywhere else. He never had any plans to settle down in Buffalo. They may have even promised to deadline deal him if the season went badly, which is what I expect happens anyway. 2
JP51 Posted December 4 Report Posted December 4 3 hours ago, PerreaultForever said: I heard ya the first time 🙂 Zucker didn't come here to lead us out of the wilderness or to win a cup. Zucker came here because he's an aging veteran and we paid him a lot more than he was going to get anywhere else. He never had any plans to settle down in Buffalo. They may have even promised to deadline deal him if the season went badly, which is what I expect happens anyway. Lol I have been on a rant bender today lol 😆 and I do agree with you 100% he isn't the future he is a top 9 filler 1
Wyldnwoody44 Posted December 5 Report Posted December 5 On 12/2/2024 at 10:12 AM, sabremike said: At least Woody isn't refusing to spend to the cap on the Jets because he's building a stadium for his other team. Guys, seriously... I only made 5 billion last year.... A guys gotta eat...
Recommended Posts