Originally Posted by ridinryan44
Reply With Quote
Awesome...I just sent an email to two local sports radio hosts (and copied two others) who continually kiss Ruff's ass year-in and year-out. Now I really don't have an issue if you are pro-Ruff. My issue is the why you are pro-Ruff, and further, my issue with these two hosts is their lame excuses (eg, injuries, more trades are needed....blah-blah-blah).
My email (aptly entitled: Sycophants Say What?) was composed while at work so it wasn't quite as thorough as I would have liked. I borrowed some my my previous posts here, but overall I thought I made some very valid points. So below is my exchange
Me:
First, let me say that I have long been an advocate and defender of Ruff. Always have I, year-in/year-out, given him the benefit of the doubt. No more.
Furthermore, I can't stand the incessant butt smooching of Ruff displayed by Jeremy and Bulldog. I sometimes believe you boys take a devil's advocate position, repeat ad nauseum, and ultimately wind up believing your once hypothetical positions. The flip side is you both are condescendingly arrogant - infallible legends in your own minds, as it were.
The injury-as-a-defense argument fails on its face. Philly has had more injuries than the Sabres at times throughout the season, yet has continued to ice a very competitive team - 2nd overall, w/out their star player. Penguins have had a rash of injuries to rival that of the Sabres, including long term injuries to their stars, yet where are they in the standings? (hint: 4th overall). Why the continual success? Good coaching.
So let's cease the Well, when they get their star players back everything will be fine speech...shall we? After all, it's not as if the Sabres were crushing opponents prior to the onslaught of injuries.
Now onto the players....
Do certain players need to be traded. Oh you betcha. Roy and Stafford top my list of lazy underachievers. But that doesn't somehow preclude the notion that Ruff must go. The two propositions are not mutually exclusive so stop acting as if they are.
Secondly, the team as a whole plays inconsistent at best, utterly apathetic at worst. Generally, such play is evidence of a systemic problem (i.e. the coaches system, or the GM) - rather than merely a one or two player problem easily resolved through a trade.
Besides, trading Roy and/or Stafford now would be equivalent to selling low - not a wise GM move. Instead, Regier should wait until either player hits a point spurt and then sell high. But then the likes of you two would bash him for moving two players who have "turned it around" - despite the historical evidence to the contrary.
Too many kids on the team? Hmmmm...let's ask Florida how they've succeeded to third overall. I bet their answer would be Kevin Dineen. What's the common denominator between Philly, Pittsburgh and Florida? Great coaching. Granted Florida/Dineen is still a tad too early to judge, but considering the players with whom Dineen is succeeding, I'd say the argument sways to his favor.
Look I get the argument that Regeir/Ruff are inextricably linked, and, therefore, you can't fire one w/ out the other following. But this is not Regeir's doing (not entirely). He can't trade for a forward to save his life, but the d-men he's acquired are very good. Not to mention he drafts like a maniac - Garrett Memorial anyone??? Tyler Myers, Luke Adam, Brayden McNabb, Zach Kassian all would be great players, and all will suffer the ubiquitous locker room disease known as Lazyassus Apatheticae(a/k/a Ruff-itis).
Proponents of Ruff need to stop viewing the second half of the previous 2009-2010 season as the rule, and view it as the exception that it truly is. Ruff has had his moments and should be praised for them, but 1997 is a long damn time ago. Let's keep things in perspective. He is a good coach able to ice a relatively competitive team. No more no less.
He is also a coach who's lost his team.
First reply:
Weird that you're on board until now...and others that are still on board (not jumping yet) are "incessant butt smoochers". Glad you finally pulled your lips off that same ass.
I never play devils advocate. I am not condescending.
But I certainly deal with people of YOUR attitude, acting like I'm taking a piss in your cornflakes for disagreeing with you. I get plenty of these emails on a daily basis. That can harden you a bit.
I think Lindy Ruff is a good coach. You don't have to. End of story.
His last statement is true on its face; I don't have to agree. Problem is I am not a sports radio host....he is. And as one I would lay sufficient premises to justify my conclusion, rather than merely repeating ad nauseum "I think Ruff is a good coach", and hoping people blindly believe you.
Besides, I never said he wasn't a good coach. Problem is I desire a great coach.
(kinda...maybe)
