Who's ready for a boycott?

[Crusader1969]

1 hour ago, Weave said:

Yup. The planned losing right up through Power is all the proof we need that it all worked.

Enjoy watching your ***** hockey another season.

I really struggle with people's inability to separate the Tank from the rebuild

Once they traded for ROR and Lehner at the 2015 draft after trading for an injured Kane late in 14-15 season  the tank was over and the next phase the rebuild started 

Not to mention, thinking that what happened 10 years ago has anything to  do with this years team is half really dumb and half crazy.  Where does it end?

Is this years Bills team destined to lose the Super Bowl because of what happened from 1990 to 1994? When does it end? 

[Indabuff]

8 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

 

Is this years Bills team destined to lose the Super Bowl because of what happened from 1990 to 1994? When does it end? 

[Weave]

7 hours ago, Crusader1969 said:

I really struggle with people's inability to separate the Tank from the rebuild

Once they traded for ROR and Lehner at the 2015 draft after trading for an injured Kane late in 14-15 season  the tank was over and the next phase the rebuild started 

Not to mention, thinking that what happened 10 years ago has anything to  do with this years team is half really dumb and half crazy.  Where does it end?

Is this years Bills team destined to lose the Super Bowl because of what happened from 1990 to 1994? When does it end? 

I really struggle to understand people who can root for a team to lose then have a tantrum when it becomes habitual.

Edit to add:

I also soundly reject the idea that the tank was successful.

1. We did not get the consensus #1 player in either year.

2. In the marquee draft we got the consolation prize.  The look on Murray’s face is all you needed to know that it was a disappointing result.

3. The results of those two drafts did not produce a meaningful change in team results.

4. The actions to get those two players led to an additional decade plus where winning was not prioritized by team upper management 

If your definition of success is getting the second choice in both drafts, having it produce no meaningful change in team results, and led to a culture of lowered expectations, I struggle to understand your definition of success.

 

Edited Tuesday at 12:39 PM by Weave

[bob_sauve28]

Wouldn't a riot be more fun? I mean come on, the insurance companies will pay for the damages. 

Think of the publicity it would generate. We could ride through downtown on E-bikes throwing snowball and saying really mean things to people. 

[Weave]

23 minutes ago, bob_sauve28 said:

Wouldn't a riot be more fun? I mean come on, the insurance companies will pay for the damages. 

Think of the publicity it would generate. We could ride through downtown on E-bikes throwing snowball and saying really mean things to people. 

I’m not putting any more effort into it than the players.

Which probably means I’ll talk about it a bit, not show up when it counts, and look real concerned and say “we have to execute and be accountable” in the post riot interview.

[Pimlach]

8 hours ago, Crusader1969 said:

I really struggle with people's inability to separate the Tank from the rebuild

Once they traded for ROR and Lehner at the 2015 draft after trading for an injured Kane late in 14-15 season  the tank was over and the next phase the rebuild started 

Not to mention, thinking that what happened 10 years ago has anything to  do with this years team is half really dumb and half crazy.  Where does it end?

Is this years Bills team destined to lose the Super Bowl because of what happened from 1990 to 1994? When does it end? 

Unfortunately the stains of what happened 10 years (and more) are still there.  They still affect the perception of the franchise on the outside.  Hockey players talk.  

Lehner left and publicly trashed the team for many years, claiming his injuries and his alienation and mental health issues were exacerbated by this team.   The story of ROR losing his love for the game in Buffalo and then winning a Cup/Selke/Smythe is still very much alive in the NHL.  Kane and Bogo, flawed as they are, are not ambassadors of the way the organization is run.  

The legend of ineptitude continues and gets worse with the hiring of a soccer coach, the Eichel injury fiasco, the trades of top talent like Reinhart, and the consistent fielding of young teams far below the salary cap.  Especially hard is seeing ex Sabres winning and thriving.  The chronic losing in Buffalo continues unabated by a GM that is both tone deaf and ineffective.  They are not a serious hockey club.   

This organization had the 4th highest winning percentage in the NHL from inception in 1970 to the time Pegula arrived.  It’s all destroyed.  Any good, and any glory we once had is tarnished and buried.  The TANK was a massive FAIL and ruined the perception of the organization.  

It ends when they can achieve a level of consistent winning, and players want to come here, not just be here as Adams says, they should want to come here and thrive here.  

[JP51]

I havent gone to a game, bought anything Sabres related, or quite honestly watched many games from pre game to post since in almost 10 years.... I desperately want to like hockey again... I grew up with the French Connection and the Stanley Cup finals... but quite honestly, this team has stripped me of not only my love of the Sabres, but of the game of Hockey in general... right or wrong that is where I am at... yet, I am here... so somewhere I still care or maybe just hope for a day that I can care again.... 

[DarthEbriate]

58 minutes ago, Weave said:

I’m not putting any more effort into it than the players.

Which probably means I’ll talk about it a bit, not show up when it counts, and look real concerned and say “we have to execute and be accountable” in the post riot interview.

After the riot, sitting on the curb with hands zip-tied, bleary-eyed from the waves of tear gas, @Weave waits to be put on the bus to somewhere for processing and is heard to utter, "I've lost my love for the riot. I don't want to be here anymore."

The Sabres cop cuts the zips and cheerily replies, "Well, off you go then. Don't forget to come to Fan Appreciation Night in April!"

[TheAud]

[SwampD]

10 hours ago, Crusader1969 said:

I really struggle with people's inability to separate the Tank from the rebuild

Once they traded for ROR and Lehner at the 2015 draft after trading for an injured Kane late in 14-15 season  the tank was over and the next phase the rebuild started 

Not to mention, thinking that what happened 10 years ago has anything to  do with this years team is half really dumb and half crazy.  Where does it end?

Is this years Bills team destined to lose the Super Bowl because of what happened from 1990 to 1994? When does it end? 

I really struggle with people’s ability to think that separating them should mean anything of importance. Whether successfully or not, it should never have happened. It was completely unnecessary.

I couldn’t care less (..!.. @Doohicksie) if you think I am dumb or crazy. I believe we are still trying to dig out of the hole left by the tank. At the very least, the team is dealing with the scars it left.

[Crusader1969]

8 minutes ago, SwampD said:

I really struggle with people’s ability to think that separating them should mean anything of importance. Whether successfully or not, it should never have happened. It was completely unnecessary.

I couldn’t care less (..!.. @Doohicksie) if you think I am dumb or crazy. I believe we are still trying to dig out of the hole left by the tank. At the very least, the team is dealing with the scars it left.

Just yes no.  Would this team be better off with Eichel and Reinhart? 

why do the Sabres have scars from those years and the Oilers don't? 

 

[SwampD]

1 minute ago, Crusader1969 said:

Just yes no.  Would this team be better off with Eichel and Reinhart? 

why do the Sabres have scars from those years and the Oilers don't? 

 

Nice straw man, but if I have to answer a dumb question, I’ll say, I don’t know,… maybe?

The Oilers were terrible for a very long time before their tank actually worked.

[Crusader1969]

2 minutes ago, SwampD said:

Nice straw man, but if I have to answer a dumb question, I’ll say, I don’t know,… maybe?

The Oilers were terrible for a very long time before their tank actually worked.

Glad you can admit a tank can actually work.  Took the Oilers time but eventually they successfully rebuilt with the 2 pieces they got in the 14 and 15 draft. 
It's laughable to think the answer to"would this team be better with Eichel and Reinhart and subtracting Tuch and Krebs" is "I don't know".   Cmon we all know the answer to that one 

maybe this will help ?

 

[SwampD]

Just now, Crusader1969 said:

Glad you can admit a tank can actually work.  Took the Oilers time but eventually they successfully rebuilt with the 2 pieces they got in the 14 and 15 draft. 
It's laughable to think the answer to"would this team be better with Eichel and Reinhart and subtracting Tuch and Krebs" is "I don't know".   Cmon we all know the answer to that one 

maybe this will help ?

 

And I misspoke before, the Oilers didn’t tank, they were just really really bad for a long time. They didn’t sell off all of their players for picks in order to be bad like the Sabres.

And there is no way of being sure that we would be better with them, especially because we weren’t. Playing the hypothetical game is a waste of time.

We should have never tanked, period. It was a stupid plan, imo.

 

[Crusader1969]

32 minutes ago, SwampD said:

And I misspoke before, the Oilers didn’t tank, they were just really really bad for a long time. They didn’t sell off all of their players for picks in order to be bad like the Sabres.

And there is no way of being sure that we would be better with them, especially because we weren’t. Playing the hypothetical game is a waste of time.

We should have never tanked, period. It was a stupid plan, imo.

 

It netted you two of the top 10 forwards in the world and somehow you can't be sure the Sabres would be better with them on your roster ?  

thank tank was brilliant and it worked to perfection.  Unfortunately that's the only thing that has ever worked for the Sabres 

 

If you won't accept the Oilers tanked to get McDavid and Draisaitl.  how about the Leafs in the Matthews year?  Were they trying to win when they played Sparks down the stretch of the 2015-16 instead of their healthy #1 goalie James Reimer?   
will you accept the Penguins tanked to get Lemieux?  
were the Hawks trying to win when the got Kane and Toews? 

[Weave]

[MattPie]

The Sabres/NHL aren't even getting YouTube highlights revenue from me this year for 90% of the games.

[Ogelthorpe]

I already have. Have only listened or watch parts of games. Canceled seasons years ago. Won't even go to games with freebies. The Sabres have ruined my love of hockey. Won't spend a dime on either organization 

[Weave]

21 minutes ago, MattPie said:

The Sabres/NHL aren't even getting YouTube highlights revenue from me this year for 90% of the games.

Yeah, I only watch highlights when we’ve won.  So I haven’t watched a youtube highlight video since *checks calendar*… *flips page*…

 

Damn, it’s been awhile.
 

 

[Thorner]

2 hours ago, Crusader1969 said:

Glad you can admit a tank can actually work.  Took the Oilers time but eventually they successfully rebuilt with the 2 pieces they got in the 14 and 15 draft. 
It's laughable to think the answer to"would this team be better with Eichel and Reinhart and subtracting Tuch and Krebs" is "I don't know".   Cmon we all know the answer to that one 

maybe this will help ?

 

The problem is that the type of uncreative, out-of-ideas thinking that leads a team to electing to tank as their best option in the FIRST PLACE is indicative of a management group unlikely to have the aptitude to built out a team on balance *at all*, never mind one that’s been burned to the ground and salted.

The point being missed is that finishing last was the easiest part of that strategy. The strategy fails if its very processes in being  implemented render the roster nearly unsalvageable to those that implemented the strategy.

Let me explain:

if the strategy to get rich is to rob a bank at gunpoint, they are going to give you the money. That’s the easy part. Once you get caught shortly after, because your plan to get the money (hey, we got it!) was so frivolous it created a situation that collapses on itself, was the bank robbery a success? 

that’s what you are saying essentially. “Well, we got the money” 

2 hours ago, SwampD said:

And I misspoke before, the Oilers didn’t tank, they were just really really bad for a long time. They didn’t sell off all of their players for picks in order to be bad like the Sabres.

And there is no way of being sure that we would be better with them, especially because we weren’t. Playing the hypothetical game is a waste of time.

We should have never tanked, period. It was a stupid plan, imo.

 

I got you 

Edited Tuesday at 06:48 PM by Thorner

[SwampD]

1 hour ago, Crusader1969 said:

It netted you two of the top 10 forwards in the world and somehow you can't be sure the Sabres would be better with them on your roster ?  

thank tank was brilliant and it worked to perfection.  Unfortunately that's the only thing that has ever worked for the Sabres 

 

If you won't accept the Oilers tanked to get McDavid and Draisaitl.  how about the Leafs in the Matthews year?  Were they trying to win when they played Sparks down the stretch of the 2015-16 instead of their healthy #1 goalie James Reimer?   
will you accept the Penguins tanked to get Lemieux?  
were the Hawks trying to win when the got Kane and Toews? 

There is a HUGE difference between selling at the trade deadline to improve draft position (Matthew’s) and going on a multi year campaign of intentionally trying to lose.

Lemieux was 40 years ago. Your list shows that success through tanking does not have a very high hit rate. IMO, it is and was a stupid plan and we are still paying for it, IMO.

[Crusader1969]

18 minutes ago, SwampD said:

There is a HUGE difference between selling at the trade deadline to improve draft position (Matthew’s) and going on a multi year campaign of intentionally trying to lose.

Lemieux was 40 years ago. Your list shows that success through tanking does not have a very high hit rate. IMO, it is and was a stupid plan and we are still paying for it, IMO.

When does it end?  Do we pay for it for another 10 years ? 20 years?  Or are they cursed forever ?  Maybe Terry has to die in order for the curse to be lifted ? 

Not one player on today's roster was around or even drafted by the Sabres in 2014-15.  To say their losing in 2024-25 is tied to the 2014-15 is ludicrous

Almost as crazy as not being sure if the team wouldn't be better off with Eichel and Samson on it over Krebs and Tuch 
 

 

[SwampD]

3 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

When does it end?  Do we pay for it for another 10 years ? 20 years?  Or are they cursed forever ?  Maybe Terry has to die in order for the curse to be lifted ? 

Not one player on today's roster was around or even drafted by the Sabres in 2014-15.  To say their losing in 2024-25 is tied to the 2014-15 is ludicrous

Almost as crazy as not being sure if the team wouldn't be better off with Eichel and Samson on it over Krebs and Tuch 
 

 

I’m hoping tonight!

[SwampD]

55 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

When does it end?  Do we pay for it for another 10 years ? 20 years?  Or are they cursed forever ?  Maybe Terry has to die in order for the curse to be lifted ? 

Not one player on today's roster was around or even drafted by the Sabres in 2014-15.  To say their losing in 2024-25 is tied to the 2014-15 is ludicrous

Almost as crazy as not being sure if the team wouldn't be better off with Eichel and Samson on it over Krebs and Tuch 
 

 

Right now, I would absolutely do a one for one swap of each and we would be better. But it’s a blush!t straw man because we have no idea what other moves would have been different and how the team would look. I can’t say with any certainty that the Sabres would be any better or worse had they both not been traded.

And you can’t either.

[Crusader1969]

6 minutes ago, SwampD said:

Right now, I would absolutely do a one for one swap of each and we would be better. But it’s a blush!t straw man because we have no idea what other moves would have been different and how the team would look. I can’t say with any certainty that the Sabres would be any better or worse had they both not been traded.

And you can’t either.

I guess you can't say for certain either if the Bills would be better or worse off if they drafted the other Josh?