PTS Posted July 27, 2006 Report Posted July 27, 2006 When asked about the team's payroll and what Tommy Boy thought, Larry said Tom "told him he's too worried about the money". Does that mean Billionaire Sugar Packet Stealer Tom Golisano is going to pay to keep this team together?
X. Benedict Posted July 27, 2006 Report Posted July 27, 2006 When asked about the team's payroll and what Tommy Boy thought, Larry said Tom "told him he's too worried about the money". Does that mean Billionaire Sugar Packet Stealer Tom Golisano is going to pay to keep this team together. I heard that. I wonder if Tom has caught the fever. I think he was legitimatly touched last year by the passion and the thanks.
LabattBlue Posted July 27, 2006 Report Posted July 27, 2006 I think Quinny is confused. What Tommy G told him was..."how much F***ing money is it going to cost me to make the slug go away. Spending money on players doesn't bother me, but your screw-up is going to cost me a lot in jersey sales!" :lol:
Corp000085 Posted July 27, 2006 Report Posted July 27, 2006 I heard that. I wonder if Tom has caught the fever. I think he was legitimatly touched last year by the passion and the thanks. For you to watch tom golisano and say that he's just in it for the money or exposure, you're absolutely, 100% kidding yourself. The guy was literally crapping his pants with ever OT winner... The guy basically cried in carolina after game 7... No owner leaves air conditioning to brave the 100 degree heat of a parking lot in an AWAY GAME to visit with the fans (including the beer showers). Tom's in it for the long haul, and if that means overspending the budget for a year or two untill revenue catches up, then who cares!
inkman Posted July 27, 2006 Report Posted July 27, 2006 including the beer showers... Someone showed TG with beer... :o
bob_sauve28 Posted July 27, 2006 Report Posted July 27, 2006 I heard that. I wonder if Tom has caught the fever. I think he was legitimatly touched last year by the passion and the thanks. I do too. And don't forget he ran for governor on his own dime and got nothing back for it. He's an old guy with a lot of money. He loves the sabres. I'd spend the money if I had it
Corp000085 Posted July 27, 2006 Report Posted July 27, 2006 Someone showed TG with beer... :o no, but you can imagine there was some spillage due to the fact that there were 10,000 buffalonians there who had been drinking for the past 12 hours.
apuszczalowski Posted July 28, 2006 Report Posted July 28, 2006 But, I thought if you spend to the cap on player payroll you won't win in the new NHL? Isn't that what everyone has been saying around here every since Buffalo started winning with a low payroll? I don't care how much the team spends, just as long as they are winning. What I can't stand is when they start letting players go that are part of the core go because they supposed are asking for to much money, or want an extra year in their contract when there is plenty of room under the salary cap to do it.
BetweenThePipes00 Posted July 28, 2006 Report Posted July 28, 2006 But, I thought if you spend to the cap on player payroll you won't win in the new NHL? Isn't that what everyone has been saying around here every since Buffalo started winning with a low payroll? No, what everyone was saying (or should have been saying) was you can't pay a few guys huge bucks and be banging against the cap and win. The Sabres could end up spending pretty close to the cap with one guy making $5 million and no one else even making $4 million. That means they are still balanced and not relying on one or two guys too much. I think they are going to end up spending more than anyone originally thought and probably more than they can truly afford. They will still not get to the cap. apus, if they spend $40 million and lose money, would you still be upset because they did not spend to the cap? That's $11 million more than last season. I mean, in your opinion do you think they should spend to the cap to keep the team together, even if they lose $8 million? It sounds like that is what you are saying, and it just seems shortsighted. That just takes them down the road to bankruptcy again.
apuszczalowski Posted July 28, 2006 Report Posted July 28, 2006 I think they are going to end up spending more than anyone originally thought and probably more than they can truly afford. They will still not get to the cap. apus, if they spend $40 million and lose money, would you still be upset because they did not spend to the cap? That's $11 million more than last season. I mean, in your opinion do you think they should spend to the cap to keep the team together, even if they lose $8 million? It sounds like that is what you are saying, and it just seems shortsighted. That just takes them down the road to bankruptcy again. As a fan of the team, I really could care less What they spend and if that will lead them to lose money right now AS LONG AS THE ARE WINNING. Why? because with them winning, the money will come in and they will become more economically stable. If they win and the money still doesn't come rolling in, then I'm afraid to say it, but Buffalo should not have a team. I don't want to see a mediocre team on the ice that doesn't have a chance to win it all just so the team can break even every year. I want a winner in buffalo, and if it is gonna cost Golisano a couple bucks, thats what he has to do, or get out as an owner
BetweenThePipes00 Posted July 28, 2006 Report Posted July 28, 2006 As a fan of the team, I really could care less What they spend and if that will lead them to lose money right now AS LONG AS THE ARE WINNING. Why? because with them winning, the money will come in and they will become more economically stable. If they win and the money still doesn't come rolling in, then I'm afraid to say it, but Buffalo should not have a team. I don't want to see a mediocre team on the ice that doesn't have a chance to win it all just so the team can break even every year. I want a winner in buffalo, and if it is gonna cost Golisano a couple bucks, thats what he has to do, or get out as an owner If it was a pattern of behavior over 30 years like Chicago or Boston, I would agree with you ... if you just care about money and don't try to win you should not own the team, and if you can't make money winning you should not have one. But that is not what is happening here. the guy has owned the team for 2 whole years and they are still getting their feet under them. And on top of it, they are holding this team together pretty well ... considering the hole they were in doesn't he get more than 2 years to stabalize it before it's "Win at all costs!" ?
MBD Posted July 29, 2006 Report Posted July 29, 2006 Golisano came and took over a team he had no passion for and tried to get its financial house in order. Having done that, thanks in large part to the new CBA, and then catching hockey fever, he's understandably willing to spend more money. If he were to buy the Bills, I'd expect him to spend money from the get-go.
GGM Posted July 29, 2006 Report Posted July 29, 2006 Here's how I see it: Tommy G. is obviously not your usual sports franchise owner. Because of that, he doesn't conform to one of the two types of (typical) team-owning philosophies. Those being the "bottom line guy" and the "win at all costs, money be damned guy". I really think that Tommy will be able to spend freely in years when the team is but a few tools from finishing the job, but also go fiscal in years where getting the 8 seed is the goal. I gotta say, I for one would be TOTALLY on board with this way of doing things. I'll even renew my season tix during the years that they're worth more than the team's payroll. If Tommy's ready to committ to years like this, I'll committ to years that they need to drag Jason Patrick AND Mike Robitaille out of the booth to play for them.
gregkash Posted July 29, 2006 Report Posted July 29, 2006 When asked about the team's payroll and what Tommy Boy thought, Larry said Tom "told him he's too worried about the money". Does that mean Billionaire Sugar Packet Stealer Tom Golisano is going to pay to keep this team together? god stop this guys, have you seen what's happening. Almost our whole D is here long term. most our forwards are here long term. Okay, C'mon think about it.. Pominville could turn into a 30 goal scorer, and because they signed him now for a little over value THEYLL HAVE HIM AT 1.22MM in 2 years when he's 25 and kicking ass. Same with any number of players. I'm so excited about this team, im shitting my pants. The Buffalo Sabres are here to stay. So please stop with your questioning and take a look at what's going on... don't you get it. We were 20 minutes from playing for the cup. Okay, arguably injuries wore us out from that. This TEAM is back. TEAM. BACK. STOP BEING LITTLE DOODOOHEADS.
PTS Posted July 29, 2006 Author Report Posted July 29, 2006 god stop this guys, have you seen what's happening. Almost our whole D is here long term. most our forwards are here long term. Okay, C'mon think about it.. Pominville could turn into a 30 goal scorer, and because they signed him now for a little over value THEYLL HAVE HIM AT 1.22MM in 2 years when he's 25 and kicking ass. Same with any number of players. I'm so excited about this team, im shitting my pants. The Buffalo Sabres are here to stay. So please stop with your questioning and take a look at what's going on... don't you get it. We were 20 minutes from playing for the cup. Okay, arguably injuries wore us out from that. This TEAM is back. TEAM. BACK. STOP BEING LITTLE DOODOOHEADS. What the HELL are you talking about? Who's questioning what? I simply alluded to the fact that Tommy G is spending the money to keep this team together and I full expect the Sabres to flat out DOMINATE next season.
Stoner Posted July 29, 2006 Report Posted July 29, 2006 Come on, PTS, don't back away from your comment. Stealing sugar packets? Where do you come up with that stuff?
deluca67 Posted July 30, 2006 Report Posted July 30, 2006 As a fan of the team, I really could care less What they spend and if that will lead them to lose money right now AS LONG AS THE ARE WINNING. Why? because with them winning, the money will come in and they will become more economically stable. If they win and the money still doesn't come rolling in, then I'm afraid to say it, but Buffalo should not have a team. I don't want to see a mediocre team on the ice that doesn't have a chance to win it all just so the team can break even every year. I want a winner in buffalo, and if it is gonna cost Golisano a couple bucks, thats what he has to do, or get out as an owner I know we live in an 'all or nothing' society, that's still pretty weak. <_< I think money gets way to much credit in sports. Did you know the Yankees have spent $1 Billion dollars on player salaries since their last World Series victory. It's not what you spend it's how you spend it and on whom. The Sabres have a solid business model which will allow them to compete on the ice and make a profit. Part of the plan is to keep the payroll at an reasonable level while not overpaying a player or getting into a outrageous long term contract that will hurt them down the road. I know fans get upset when the Sabres want to base a contract on the skills of a player and what he adds to the team. Unlike fans who think contracts should be based on how many times they make it onto SportsCenter. How many times has someone said "I don't think Briere is worth $5 million but the Sabres should pay him anyway". Or something like that. Golisano, Quinn and Regier can't think like fans. They have to be better then that. While fans are running around like Chicken Litttle screaming the "sky is falling" they have to stay the course which will lead this franchise to a Cup much sooner then later. ;)
blugold43 Posted July 30, 2006 Report Posted July 30, 2006 a few tools from finishing the job.... brrrrr.... :o can you please phrase that differently! you're gonna give me nightmares!
GGM Posted July 30, 2006 Report Posted July 30, 2006 brrrrr.... :o can you please phrase that differently! you're gonna give me nightmares! I don't know about you, but I would have taken a Phillips OR a Flathead blueliner before Game 7 in Carolina last year. :) In all seriousness, I'm pretty sure Tommy G > John Gotti Rigas when it comes to balancing fan interests (PR) and economic interests. He really has been a perfect fit for the organaization...Although many people thought that about Rigas, as well. To be totally honest, I just want an owner & GM who don't make decisions based upon fear. Whether that fear comes from fans, players, the NHL, or the economy. I'm not suggesting we get a front office that is reckless, as prudence is still job #1. But you have to take your shots and put a little something on the line every so often, or like what has been mentioned before, what's the point of having a team? I feel safe with Galisano at the helm -- not because he'll never frustrate me -- but because when he does, it'll probably be for my (the team's) own good.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.