HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Buffalo Sabres
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Sabres plummet in ESPN's Ultimate Team Rankings

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-07-2012, 01:36 PM
  #1
Takeo
Registered User
 
Takeo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 18,946
vCash: 500
Sabres plummet in ESPN's Ultimate Team Rankings

Bang For The Buck (BNG): Wins during the past three years (regular season plus postseason) per revenues directly from fans, adjusted for league schedules.

Fan Relations (FRL): Openness and consideration toward fans by players, coaches and management.

Ownership (OWN): Honesty and loyalty to core players and local community.

Affordability (AFF): Price of tickets, parking and concessions.

Stadium Experience (STX): Quality of arena and game-day promotions as well as friendliness of environment.

Players (PLA): Effort on the field and likability off it.

Coaching (CCH): Strength of on-field leadership.

Title Track (TTR): Championships already won or expected in the lifetime of current fans.



No. 60 (of 122 professional sports teams): BUFFALO SABRES
Last year's rank: 11
Title track: 92
Ownership: 32
Coaching: 78
Players: 111
Fan relations: 59
Affordability: 26
Stadium experience: 73
Bang for the buck: 30

Hockey fans in Nickel City appreciate that new owner Terry Pegula isn't nickel-and-diming them. The energy magnate and former season-ticket holder, who in 1983 told his business partner, "If I ever have more than two nickels to my name, I'm going to buy the Buffalo Sabres one day," did just that last year, then proceeded to invest millions of nickels into an arena makeover that included new paint (blue and gold, natch), new locker rooms (cost: $6 million) and new victuals (the Main & Fillmore Hot Dog comes standard with chili, cheese, mustard and onions), not to mention a new name (adios HSBC Arena, hello First Niagara Center). All while keeping ticket prices nearly 20 bucks below the league average. Still, the Sabres plummeted 49 spots, tied for the seventh-biggest free fall in this year's rankings, thanks to an antsy fan base (title track: 92) whose team hasn't won a playoff series since 2007, whose city hasn't won a title of any kind since the Bills were AFL champs in 1965, and whose fans are fed up with watching soft hockey (see lack of retaliation following Milan Lucic's hit on G Ryan Miller). Says sabrespace.com user ParkMeadow: "Like most Buffalo sports fans, all I ask is for my team to display heart and effort ... and these Sabres show neither." If only we had a nickel for every time we heard that.

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/teamrankings

Takeo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 01:38 PM
  #2
SackTastic
Embrace The Suck
 
SackTastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 5,180
vCash: 500
Not crapping on you for posting it, but another useless power ranking. Plus I always chortle when these things quote random forum user, like anything we say is actually important.

SackTastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 01:41 PM
  #3
HockeyH3aven
#Flynnsanity
 
HockeyH3aven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Buffalo NY
Country: United States
Posts: 6,214
vCash: 500
These rankings are borderline retarded. Anything that ranks the Coyotes as the #8 professional sports franchise is a joke.

HockeyH3aven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 01:48 PM
  #4
ZZamboni
Puttin' on the Foil
 
ZZamboni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 10,898
vCash: 500
An article from ESPN ... That's the first mistake. Rankings of half those teams are so wrong. This has as much legitimacy as Ecklund.

ZZamboni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 01:54 PM
  #5
Duddy
Everyday is
 
Duddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: Austria
Posts: 10,435
vCash: 500
oh no

Duddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 02:01 PM
  #6
Takeo
Registered User
 
Takeo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 18,946
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beechsack View Post
Not crapping on you for posting it, but another useless power ranking. Plus I always chortle when these things quote random forum user, like anything we say is actually important.
Most threads are useless. The point of the rankings is conversation, which is alas the point of a messageboard. Although I'm not surprised that posters are actually offended by this.

Takeo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 02:05 PM
  #7
HockeyH3aven
#Flynnsanity
 
HockeyH3aven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Buffalo NY
Country: United States
Posts: 6,214
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeo View Post
Most threads are useless. The point of the rankings is conversation, which is alas the point of a messageboard. Not surprised that people are actually offended by this.
Not offended, I don't even care where the sabres are ranked. I'm irritated because it's a huge waste of internet bandwidth.

It is kind of silly basically nothing about the Sabres changed and they dropped so low. Just shows you how legitimate the rankings are.

HockeyH3aven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 02:10 PM
  #8
SackTastic
Embrace The Suck
 
SackTastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 5,180
vCash: 500
My contribution to the discussion is : power rankings are dumb.

I mean, a bankrupt, league owned team that nobody seems to be able to buy is somehow considered overall a better franchise than every other NHL franchise? Better than long time great organizations like the Steelers, Packers, Yankees, Celtics, etc, etc?

I do find it somewhat interesting to compare franchises in this way, but the methodology used in this ranking clearly came from a heroin addict.

EDIT : Also, to nitpick, the purpose of these rankings is nothing more than to draw traffic for advertising revenue.

SackTastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 02:12 PM
  #9
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 18,197
vCash: 326
Based on the 2011 rankings, it looks like the people filling out these surveys really turned on players (49th to 111th) and the coaching (12th to 78th), and believe the Sabres are farther from a title than where they were at this time last year--not surprising conclusions given what happened last season.

Zip15 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 02:13 PM
  #10
slip
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,958
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyH3aven View Post
These rankings are borderline retarded. Anything that ranks the Coyotes as the #8 professional sports franchise is a joke.
Good point.

Then again, the Laffs are ranked dead last at 122. Maybe there is some validity to their methodology after all?

slip is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 02:25 PM
  #11
bullseyed
Registered User
 
bullseyed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Amherst, NY
Posts: 257
vCash: 500
The quoted part of the article essentially says that the ranking dropped because of the negativity of the fan base. Thanks WGR!

bullseyed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 02:36 PM
  #12
brian_griffin
Measured Intangibles
 
brian_griffin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Z4QQQ batman symbol
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 6,784
vCash: 500
^^^
Any truth to the rumor this year's algorithm was updated to include a ninth numerical term in the equation:

Just Ask Messageboard Experts (Jame):

which was either zero, or slightly positive, for all pro sports franchises, with the exception of the Sabres, for which it was very negative

brian_griffin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 02:38 PM
  #13
Chainshot
Global Moderator
Give 'em Enough Rope
 
Chainshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Costa Rica
Country: Costa Rica
Posts: 56,891
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullseyed View Post
The quoted part of the article essentially says that the ranking dropped because of the negativity of the fan base. Thanks WGR!
Eh, if the team wins in any sport, fans are happier. No playoffs again hurts them in this ranking for both on-ice product and fan support/satisfaction.

__________________
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle
Chainshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 02:39 PM
  #14
SackTastic
Embrace The Suck
 
SackTastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 5,180
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by brian_griffin View Post
^^^
Any truth to the rumor this year's algorithm was updated to include a ninth numerical term in the equation:

Just Ask Messageboard Experts (Jame):

which was either zero, or slightly positive, for all pro sports franchises, with the exception of the Sabres, for which it was very negative

SackTastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 03:04 PM
  #15
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 34,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by brian_griffin View Post
^^^
Any truth to the rumor this year's algorithm was updated to include a ninth numerical term in the equation:

Just Ask Messageboard Experts (Jame):

which was either zero, or slightly positive, for all pro sports franchises, with the exception of the Sabres, for which it was very negative


well done

i accept the title you've bestowed... among those on message boards, i am an expert

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 03:07 PM
  #16
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 34,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullseyed View Post
The quoted part of the article essentially says that the ranking dropped because of the negativity of the fan base. Thanks WGR!
stupid fan base... don't they know that losing is acceptable (or at least excusable)

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 03:08 PM
  #17
MLH
Registered User
 
MLH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,292
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beechsack View Post
My contribution to the discussion is : power rankings are dumb.

I mean, a bankrupt, league owned team that nobody seems to be able to buy is somehow considered overall a better franchise than every other NHL franchise? Better than long time great organizations like the Steelers, Packers, Yankees, Celtics, etc, etc?

I do find it somewhat interesting to compare franchises in this way, but the methodology used in this ranking clearly came from a heroin addict.

EDIT : Also, to nitpick, the purpose of these rankings is nothing more than to draw traffic for advertising revenue.
The point of the survey isn't to assess the franchises financial viability, but the fan bases overall perception of the team. The Coyotes scored poorly on ownership, but their fans like the players, the coach, and managements treatment of fans. They are one of the most affordable teams to be a fan of in pro sports and are coming off a good playoff run considering payroll. They are obviously an outlier because ownership in their particular case is a bigger issue than pretty much every pro sports franchise, but that doesn't mean they should change their methodology. The only big problem with the methodology is the possible self selection in fans that choose to partake in the survey, but ultimately who cares. I guarantee you wouldn't be ripping the poll had the Sabres been 20th. There hasn't been outrage on these threads when the Sabres did well. Not surprising though.

MLH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 03:15 PM
  #18
ZZamboni
Puttin' on the Foil
 
ZZamboni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 10,898
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyH3aven View Post
Not offended, I don't even care where the sabres are ranked. I'm irritated because it's a huge waste of internet bandwidth.

It is kind of silly basically nothing about the Sabres changed and they dropped so low. Just shows you how legitimate the rankings are.
Exactly!

Offended?!?! Oh that's rich. All the responders are clearly not offended. (well obviously not clearly with the OP). Again, consider the source.

ZZamboni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 03:26 PM
  #19
Crazy Tasty
Registered User
 
Crazy Tasty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Indiana
Country: United States
Posts: 4,063
vCash: 500
Seems spot on to me.

Crazy Tasty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 03:35 PM
  #20
SackTastic
Embrace The Suck
 
SackTastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 5,180
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLH View Post
The point of the survey isn't to assess the franchises financial viability, but the fan bases overall perception of the team. The Coyotes scored poorly on ownership, but their fans like the players, the coach, and managements treatment of fans. They are one of the most affordable teams to be a fan of in pro sports and are coming off a good playoff run considering payroll. They are obviously an outlier because ownership in their particular case is a bigger issue than pretty much every pro sports franchise, but that doesn't mean they should change their methodology. The only big problem with the methodology is the possible self selection in fans that choose to partake in the survey, but ultimately who cares. I guarantee you wouldn't be ripping the poll had the Sabres been 20th. There hasn't been outrage on these threads when the Sabres did well. Not surprising though.
That's because they have to keep prices low to get anyone in the freaking building. Of COURSE they'll be affordable!

This article from Justin Bourne sums up quite well how I feel about their methodology here.

http://blogs.thescore.com/nhl/2012/0...just-terrible/

Anything that decides a franchise owned by the league is better off than a franchise with probably the most stable ownership in all of professional hockey is patently absurd.

SackTastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 04:01 PM
  #21
BuiltTagonTough
Stand still laddy!
 
BuiltTagonTough's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Buffalo
Country: United States
Posts: 10,540
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beechsack View Post
That's because they have to keep prices low to get anyone in the freaking building. Of COURSE they'll be affordable!

This article from Justin Bourne sums up quite well how I feel about their methodology here.

http://blogs.thescore.com/nhl/2012/0...just-terrible/

Anything that decides a franchise owned by the league is better off than a franchise with probably the most stable ownership in all of professional hockey is patently absurd.
Not only were they number 8 overall, they are apparently the best franchise in the NHL as well.

BuiltTagonTough is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 04:06 PM
  #22
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 34,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beechsack View Post
That's because they have to keep prices low to get anyone in the freaking building. Of COURSE they'll be affordable!

This article from Justin Bourne sums up quite well how I feel about their methodology here.

http://blogs.thescore.com/nhl/2012/0...just-terrible/

Anything that decides a franchise owned by the league is better off than a franchise with probably the most stable ownership in all of professional hockey is patently absurd.
i know right!?!?! they ranked 122 franchises, and the methodology can be called into question because of the 1 outlier....

I wouldn't post anything written by disgruntled NYI or Toronto fans

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 04:16 PM
  #23
SackTastic
Embrace The Suck
 
SackTastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 5,180
vCash: 500
Bourne is a really good hockey writer.

And there are tons of questionable rankings there. Not just one outlier.

EDIT: Just sort by stadium experience. Then laugh away. The Sabres are 73rd. Montreal 74th. Bruins 85th. I've been to multiple games at the TD Garden. It's hundreds of times better than the FNC.


Last edited by SackTastic: 09-07-2012 at 04:23 PM.
SackTastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 04:24 PM
  #24
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 34,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beechsack View Post
Bourne is a really good hockey writer.

And there are tons of questionable rankings there. Not just one outlier.
It's fan based...

Phoenix is an outlier because they are owned by the league.

http://espn.go.com/espn/story/_/id/8...-espn-magazine

Quote:
AS IN THE PAST NINE YEARS with our Ultimate Standings, we used a four-part process to rank MLB, NBA, NFL and NHL franchises. First, working with Maddock Douglas, a Chicago consulting firm, we polled 1,004 North American sports fans in early May to determine what they want in return for the time, money and emotion they invest in their favorite teams. The survey covered 25 topics, from "has players who act professionally on and off the field" to "makes it easy to buy tickets through the team website."

Second, through ESPN.com and NetReflector, a Seattle opinion research company, we asked fans of the four major leagues to rate their favorite clubs in each of these 25 areas. We received more than 56,000 responses -- thanks to all who participated! -- and grouped those responses into seven of the eight categories you see on these pages: title track, ownership, coaching, players, fan relations, affordability and stadium experience.

Third, with the help of researchers at the University of Oregon's Warsaw Sports Marketing Center, we determined how efficiently teams convert dollars from fans into on-field performance, including postseason victories. These calculations are the basis for the remaining category: bang for the buck.

Finally, we combined each team's scores across all eight categories into one final weighted average. This takes into account, for example, that fans rated affordability about twice as important as stadium experience. The result is the 2012 Ultimate Standings, the only ranking that combines fan perspective on team performance with an objective measure of how well teams turn revenue into wins. Now that's what we call fan appreciation!

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 04:26 PM
  #25
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 34,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beechsack View Post

EDIT: Just sort by stadium experience. Then laugh away. The Sabres are 73rd. Montreal 74th. Bruins 85th. I've been to multiple games at the TD Garden. It's hundreds of times better than the FNC.
What a Buffalo fan thinks of FNC vs what a Boston fan thinks of TD might not be as far off as you think.

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:40 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.