All Encompassing Tortorella..ella..ella..eh..eh...and Glen Cigar Thread Part III
View Single Post
04-11-2013, 12:14 AM
Heart and Soul
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Originally Posted by
Desire is different than outright expectation. You talk like the ultimate success has been owed to you for some reason.
People like us built the opportunity that allows these people to collect absurd amounts of money for providing a form of entertainment. The diehard affection for sports teams from fans like us created the culture that paved the way for these teams to cash big checks. I've spent money, to varying degrees, for most of my life on it. The amount of money continues to go up, and the prices are higher than most competitors around the league. The least the team could do to pay back the fans is make an honest, earnest effort to entertain, the one thing they are being paid to provide.
Perhaps for you entertainment is watching any human being wearing a Rangers jersey do just about anything on that Garden ice. Maybe you live for the cinderella story. Maybe you love cheering for underdogs. For me, that isn't the case. Underdogs are nice, and once in a while, that's fun, but that can't be the case every time. I want to watch great hockey, and I want a team that puts itself in a position to be one of the best as often as possible. I'm not alone. Occasionally, fans who share that opinion deserve to have those requests fulfilled.
You have demonstrated a lack of respect towards how difficult it is to be elite year in and year out. And how hard it is to win a cup.
"Year in and year out," he says. Surely, you jest, for when exactly was the last time this team was elite? We have had year, not years. One year, where this team was arguably elite. Winning a cup is no doubt hard, and it should be hard. Winning a cup isn't what we as fans are owed. What the fans deserve, and should at least occasionally receive from the teams that make absurd amounts of money off of that fandom, is a period of time where the team is in a strong position to compete for the Cup. Stretches of a few seasons in a row where the team plays great, world-class hockey that warrants the exorbitant price of admission for a ticket, or any other financial transaction made in support of the club.
You demonstrate a lack of respect for yourself. For me. For all of us. For the fans. There is no reason we don't occasionally deserve a high quality product. Why other team's fans and not us?
Under Glen Sather, we have never had that.
You don't seem to appreciate that every other team has sentient beings making roster decisions with the ultimate goal being directly at odds with our ultimate goal. You don't seem to respect that a handful of those teams you mentioned got to where they are today due to a prolonged period of total incompetence that we haven't had. Or a team like the pens, a combination of total incompetence and sheer "luck" in being gifted a generational player.
You don't seem to appreciate that the sentient being in charge of making decisions for this club has been a failure of historic proportions. That only one other peer in the last 20 years has come anywhere remotely close to doing as poor a job for as long a time. You don't seem to appreciate that in the long and largely pathetic history of this franchise, this sentient being stands out as one of the single worst things to ever happen to this team.
Luck? Glen Sather should have been fired 3 or 4 times over at this point. He faces virtually no accountability. He "lucked" into probably the best, most consistent goalie of this generation. He "lucked" into having a blank check at his disposal for operating the team, even with the "constraints" of a salary cap, yet all he has managed to do with this enormous leg up over the competition is "luck" into a way to constantly get rid of his frequent and egregious blunders, blunders that almost always lead to the dismissal of his peers.
But Sather never gets dismissed, so he can take as long as he wants. He can throw **** against the wall enough times until finally he finds one that sticks, and people like you will sing his praises, caring little that by the time he finds one just sticky enough, likely 15 years, 10 since the lockout, will have passed. Not bothered at all by the fact that he has been provided with resources and opportunities that few people in his position ever are, and that he has been given more time than any of his peers ever have. Not bothered at all that this man has been running the team for 13 years, and in all that time, we haven't seen an instance of world class hockey.
The luck doesn't even end there. The location makes his team a draw for a lot of players. Heck, he's even in the almost perpetually weaker conference. This all, of course, saying nothing about the incredible good fortune upon which he "built" his entire reputation. He's been plenty lucky, and yet he repeatedly proves that he is totally unqualified to perform some of the most rudimentary elements of his job, because he so often fails at these aspects of his position.
Sather is the poster boy for incompetence. His tenure with the team has been nothing but total incompetence. A tortoise-paced ascent into the area teetering between mediocrity and "not good enough." Do you really need to be one of those supermen, those Gods of Olympus, the NHL GMs, to see that it is incredibly difficult to go all the way one year, much less have a chance to do so consistently over a number of years, without several top level offensive talents? That elite players tend to give you the best chance to win?
It isn't easy to build a good team, and it definitely requires some luck, but by no means is it impossible. The formula has been laid out quite clearly. Look at the NBA. The Spurs got incredibly lucky with the chance to draft Tim Duncan, but they did so much more than just get lucky. They out drafted, out developed, and out coached virtually every team in the league. They ran circles around the league for over a decade, which is coincidentally about how long it took some of the totally inept teams run by the NBA GMs, those MENSA equivalents, to realize, "hey, maybe we should start doing the things that the Spurs do, and maybe we'll be even half as good as they are." You'd think they'd have figured that out after the first few years, but then again, doing things the Spurs way required thinking about the game in a way that was a little bit too "advanced" for some of these so-called experts running NBA teams. Now you look around the NBA, and half the teams in the league feature high ranking front office and coaching positions held by folks with ties to the Spurs front office and coaching staff.
The NHL is not much different in this regard. The formula is there. Acquire some world class players, and give yourself an extended chance to win. You have GMs who repeatedly do things that clearly conflict with the formula, and Glen Sather is one of the biggest examples of this. Now, if you want to limit yourself in the ways you're willing to get those players, fine. But then you also have to be held accountable if you can't get them or produce results within the limits that have been set.
There is nothing wrong with rebuilding. It's the entire point of having drafts! If you want to win, you need to have some of the best players. But you know what? If you are going to refuse to go what is clearly the most direct route toward success, does that mean you deserve to be measured by lower expectations or standards? The team limited itself (supposedly), so they better find a different method to get it done. And if Glen Sather can't do that, which he obviously hasn't been able to yet, then someone else should be given the opportunity to try. Or should one man be allowed to make mistake after mistake after mistake, fail to produce results year after year after year, and just keep getting more and more opportunities?
How many years should a fanbase have to wait to get something in return for their investment? How long do we have to wait before our investment pays off?
View Public Profile
NYR Sting's albums
Find More Posts by NYR Sting