Hanging curveball

Traditionally, I find that I don't pay much attention to many of the local elections. There are exceptions, naturally, mostly when I happen to know something about a particular candidate or actually am a friend. But for the most part, it's often a case of "eeny, meeny, miny, moe" when filling out the ballot.

The Erie County Sheriff race certainly qualifies. People in my generation only cared about this race once. Way back in the 1970's, Mike Amico was the sheriff. Whenever there was a rock concert in Rich Stadium, Amico seemed to devote every resource in the department toward making arrests of concert-goers. That technique was at least subject to debate, but I swear he had a news release issue about the number of arrests before the parking lots were clear. When he ran for election, everyone in my age group headed to the polls to cast a ballot for Ken Braun, who won in fine style.

It looks like it's time for another exception.

When I scanned the newspapers after returning from vacation, I discovered a surprising front-page article about the current Sheriff, Timothy Howard. He said that he doesn't support New York State's new gun control law, which is his right as a citizen.

However, he said about the law, "I won't enforce it." He thinks it's unconstitutional and thus will be overturned by the courts.

Funny - I don't remember Sheriff Howard's appointment to the Supreme Court. I thought he was elected to enforce all the laws, and not pick and choose the ones he likes. His opinion just doesn't matter.

Luckily, it's an election year, so this year's Sheriff's race will be the equivalent of a hanging curveball - an easy choice to swat out of the park. The incumbent definitely is an "eeny" this year, and the other major candidate is a "moe."

Be notified of new posts on Twitter @WDX2BB.

New boss, old boss

My coworker Miguel made the crucial comment on Tuesday night when it came crystallizing an opinion about Ron Rolston's return as the coach of the Buffalo Sabres for the 2013-14 season. Miguel said that Rolston sounds just like Darcy Regier when he talked in public. I later saw a clip of the news conference and realized that Miguel was on to something here.

All of a sudden, the hiring made good sense, at least from Regier's standpoint.

As I've written before, Regier got his hockey training under Bill Torrey with the Islanders. He picked a head coach in Al Arbour, one he was comfortable with, and stuck with him for years and years. It worked out pretty well, especially in the dynasty days of the early 1980's. Regier got the GM job in Buffalo in 1997, and stayed with Lindy Ruff through last winter for mostly the same reasons.

Put yourself in Regier's shoes at the end of the season. He knows the fans aren't happy with how things have gone lately, and he certainly might have been fired had he been associated with a different set of upper management types. The rebuilding process started with the trading of veterans leading up to the deadline. Regier needs someone as a coach that he had confidence will serve as a good teacher and partner in the process.

Rolston is right down the hallway, figuratively speaking. They'd worked together for two years, and apparently gotten along fine. Rolston did oversee an uptick in the team's play during his tenure this past season, even with some talent leaving along the way, so there's no pressure there to switch coaches for that reason. They talked alike, which can be translated into having similar philosophies about the game.

Regier is known for playing it cautious on player transactions, and we'll assume that reputation extends into other areas of his work philosophy. If this is a situation where Regier knows he had better be right, well, he's not going to be throwing any long passes. Picking Rolston might not be an simple handoff on third-and-16, but it might be a low-risk flare pass that might turn into something better.

The result? To quote the Who, "Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss."

If I can understand the hiring, I have to ask a follow-up question. Was the process done properly a good idea? I'm not so sold on that part.

We have a fan base that is disillusioned after the past couple of seasons. The team has watched the playoffs lately, and has already traded some veterans. There is talk of trading Ryan Miller and Thomas Vanek, who probably are the two best players on the roster. The bundle of draft choices involved in the spring trades aren't going to be ready to help for a while. And the hockey management team will have the same leaders.

Think there will be some empty seats at the start of the season next fall? Me too - even if a couple of high-priced free agents are signed, which would seem to go against the current plan.

I would have been tempted to at least talk to some other possible candidates. To use an historical example, John Muckler needed a new coach in the summer of 1995 after moving upstairs full-time. He picked Ted Nolan, which certainly didn't work in terms of front-office harmony. But in terms of changing the hockey culture dramatically, Nolan did that job successfully. Promoting assistant coach Don Lever probably wouldn't have had the same effect on the organization.

The fans became relatively excited about a rebuilding roster, one which thanks to Muckler's moves and Nolan's coaching went on to win a division title well ahead of schedule in 1996-97. Note: I am not saying Nolan should have gotten an interview here. But could it have hurt to interview somebody, anybody? It might have been a good opportunity to talk with outsiders about the state of the Sabres' franchise, if nothing else, as well as a bit of a public relations technique.

It's fair to say, then, that Regier didn't act like he was under pressure from the boys and girls in the marketing department to do something. He went with an option that featured the fewest unknowns, one that was obviously approved by team ownership. That sort of faith is relatively rare in professional sports, a results-oriented, high-pressure business. Now we get to see how the near future plays out to determine if the team's faith is justified.

Be notified of new posts via Twitter @WDX2BB.

Radio daze

My former boss at WEBR Radio, Mike St. Peter, put out a note of interest on Facebook this morning. Seems he is going to be addressing some communications students soon, and wanted some stories about real world mistakes.

I can only hope that hiring me is not at the top of his list.

The stories come to mind quickly. Every day in the business was another potential landmine. It comes with the territory of live broadcasts.

I should pick on myself first. WEBR did the broadcasts of the Buffalo Bisons' games around 1980. I remember my college friend, Ben Walker, once telling me once about how he was driving somewhere in Washington, listening to the Senators. During the game, announcer Shelby Whitfield said, "Fly ball to center ... curving foul." Ben almost drove off the road laughing.

I was doing a game at War Memorial Stadium one Sunday. We had a very high broadcast location, looking right down on home plate. This was great for calling balls and strikes from above, but sometimes it was hard to tell where the ball was going based on its initial flight. Sure enough, I blurted out "line drive to center ... curving foul." I immediately thought of Whitfield. The lesson was, don't be too quick to describe the action; wait a beat and prevent problems from taking place.

I never did break up in laughter while on the air, but I came mighty, mighty close once. It was Thanksgiving, I believe, and there wasn't much going on except the NFL games and the Harvard Cup. Anchor Larry Hatzi was in the main studio, giving the news, and I had the sports duties. I put on a feature report and Larry found a cart that was labeled "bomb" on the front. He asked me what it was. "I made it up just in case I need to 'blow up' callers on my talk show," I answered. "I used to listen to a Boston talk show that did that, and liked the idea." I was too polite to use it, though.

Larry put the cart into the machine and turned the pot down so the sound wouldn't go out over the air. But he set the volume level as loud as it would go and hit play. It really did sound like a bomb had gone off in the studio; I think the news editor even ran in.

Larry started laughing hard, and I was ready to do so. But ... the taped report was ending, so I was due back on the air. I knew I'd never get through the last 90 seconds of the sportscast, so I just mumbled, "That's sports, I'm Budd Bailey." And then I fell helplessly over the table, convulsing with laughter. Larry wisely went to a promotional spot or three.

Writing had its hazards too. At one point, I was writing sports scripts for people who didn't know much about sports. The wrong typo could be, um, unintentionally funny. For example, I wrote a story about a tennis competition, part of the Grand Slam of tennis. Except, I mixed up one letter. So Cynthia Wallace read what I wrote - "The Grand Slaw of Tennis." She still brings it up in a good-natured way.

One time veteran anchorman John Gill was introducing me for a sportscast. He leaned into the microphone brightly and said, "And now with the sports, here's Bud Palmer." For you younger folks, Palmer was a former pro basketball player who made the switch into broadcasting in the 1950's through 1970's or so.

The usual rule on such matters is, don't call them to the listener's attention. Naturally, being young and relatively stupid, I came back immediately with this classic response: "WHO???????" John slapped his head, apologized on the air and got my name right.

One of our anchors, who shall remain nameless, wasn't particularly good on the ad-lib. He once made a mistake which has been made by several announcers over the years -- "Coming up later on Newsradio 970, Budd Bailey has a preview of the N-Double A-C-P basketball tournament." But the story that gets passed around the most involves a tease at 59 minutes after the hour. The next anchorman would give a few headlines, and throw it to the network news. But our anchor forgot the script that particular time. Thinking fast, he said, "In the next hour on Newsradio 970 ... um ... er ... frequent checks of the time and temperature." Bet that sent our ratings soaring for the following 60 minutes.

Oddly enough, even the engineering department wasn't immune from the disease. One time an engineer was working on some wires in the building. At the same time, an anchor went into this introduction: "Next, commentator Howard Ruff has some thoughts on the state of the American economy."

At that exact moment, the engineer crossed the wrong wires and somehow got on the air. And at that exact moment, the engineer let out a bad word in frustration, followed by "...a duck in the butt." Ruff's commentary then followed. One woman called the newsroom, saying, "I thought the opening by Mr. Ruff in his commentary was a little rude." Come to think of it, you'd think more people would have called.

There probably are more stories along these lines that would come to mind if I had taken more than 10 minutes of thought to recollect them. The point, kids, is that you can't do anything wrong that hasn't happened before. Mistakes take place, and you just have to learn from them. And then you learn to laugh at them later -- in some cases much later. But you will laugh.

Be notified of new posts via Twitter @WDX2BB.

Speak up

The management books are no doubt full of advice on what sort of role top executives should take in dealing with the public. There are all sorts of role models in that sense. Remember when Chrysler decided Lee Iacocca was the best possible front man for its message - or maybe Lee himself made that decision - and he became the star of commercials and books? Then there's someone like Howard Hughes, famous as a recluse.

It applies in sports too. Take the history of the Dallas Cowboys, for example. For years, the team's owner was Clint Murchison. He wasn't exactly chatty in public, letting executives such as Tex Schramm, Gil Brandt and Tom Landry to the talking. Later on, Jerry Jones bought the Cowboys, and Jones never saw a microphone he didn't like.

Oddly enough, that has emerged as an issue with the Buffalo Sabres. You'd think the Sabres would have better things to worry about - such as trying to win games - but owner Terry Pegula's relative silence has not been a popular stance. That's especially true with the media, but the public probably wouldn't mind hearing something from him at times too. It quickly took to him when he bought the team - he was just another fan, albeit one with $3 billion. Pegula admittedly doesn't have much experience in public speaking, and probably doesn't like to do it very often.

I've got some experience in this area. When I worked from the Sabres from 1986 to 1992, Seymour Knox III was in charge of the ownership group. Knox at times had the title of team president, and he did live in Western New York, so sometimes he did make public appearances. He understood that it came with the territory. Now, no one was ever too sure what he was going to say at such events. A few times in those six years I wrote speeches for him, and listened as he gave them to see how he much when he was sticking to the text. When he strayed, I became instantly nervous - although I don't remember any huge problems off the top of my head. Still, I could almost hear the robot in "Lost in Space" say "Danger, Will Robinson" in my mind. Others had the same reaction.

I would guess some people at the First Niagara Center have similar thoughts when Pegula speaks. His clumsy attempt at a joke involving Ted Black and Byron Brown at the groundbreaking of the Webster Block project might be considered an example of those fears somewhat coming to life.

Pegula obviously has set up a management structure that outwardly insulates him. He has Black running the operation and general manager Darcy Regier running the hockey department. They are certainly in the public eye, a lot. Is that enough? I don't think so.

This isn't the oil business (Murchison) or the aviation business (Hughes). It's a very public operation, if only in part because of public contributions to such areas as buildings and infrastructure. Pro sports relies on an emotional connection between fan and team. It's not a rational connection - unless you think wearing Zubaz pants is a rational act - and it's a fragile one. The Sabres got lucky with Pegula, who got weepy at the site of Gil Perreault at the introductory news conference and thus immediately showed the fans that "I'm one of you." Ask Ralph Wilson how tough it is to buy that good will over a long period of time. Keeping that connection is important to the health of the franchise, and having Pegula make a few statements can only help in that sense.

Admittedly, the media is insatiable in such matters, so Pegula and the Sabres might have to learn to pick their spots. He doesn't have to do a monthly news conference. The odd one-on-one interview and then the occasional group session when appropriate probably would work fine. Black and Regier can handle the easy stuff; they are pros.

Such a move might defuse the situation and get everyone to work on the relatively important stuff here - winning hockey games. I have no free advice on that one at this time.

Be notified of new posts via Twitter @WDX2BB

I meant it, but ...

This is almost too easy of a target.

I note with some degree of alarm the tendency of public figures to say something really, really stupid, and cause an uproar.

And then, they don't apologize. They come up with some way of saying "sorry I offended you." That's not the same as saying, "Boy, was I stupid. Next time, have someone stop me before I speak again."

Which brings us to Arkansas state legislator Nate Bell.

Here's a man who uses Twitter and Facebook frequently - more than most news organizations as far as I can tell. On Friday, as events unfolded in Boston, Bell put out this message:

"I wonder how many Boston liberals spent the night cowering in their homes wishing they had an AR-15 with a hi-capacity magazine?"

Yes, everyone in Boston was thinking that more weapons in the region on that particular day would be a good idea. Sigh. But that's not the bad part.

When an outcry came out from a variety of sources, Mr. Bell responded this way later on Friday:

"I would like to apologize to the people of Boston, Massachusetts for the poor timing of my tweet earlier this morning. As a staunch and unwavering supporter of the individual right to self defense, I expressed my point of view without thinking of its effect on those still in time of crisis. In hindsight, given the ongoing tragedy that is still unfolding, I regret the poor choice of timing. Please know that my thoughts and prayers were with the people of Boston overnight and will continue as they recover from this tragedy."

The thought struck me that the people of Boston may have tried to put those thoughts from Bell back in the mail and sent to Arkansas if they weren't busy at the time.

There are other examples of this sort of behavior on both sides of any issue, political or otherwise. But picking on Mr. Bell at this particular time makes me feel a little better, so I'll let this stand alone.

In the meantime, take a look at the comments under his "apology" on his Facebook page. They run the spectrum.

Be notified of new posts via Twitter @WDX2BB.

When worlds collide

I just completed Bill James' book, "Popular Crime." James is best known as the man who helped popularize statistical analysis in baseball to the point where someday he should be in the Hall of Fame in Cooperstown.

A couple of years ago, James put out a book on crime. Just when we all figured he did nothing but study baseball, it turns out he's read dozens and dozens and dozens of crime books over the years. "Popular Crime" is something of a recap of a variety of murders, etc. since the 19th century. James is as quirky and entertaining as ever as a writer here, going through some famous cases in rapid-fire style over the course of 460 pages or so.

One part of the book stopped me in my tracks, but it was due to a spectacular coincidence. In a section about the book "In Cold Blood," Truman Capote's book on the murders by Floyd Wells and Richard Hickock, I came across this:

"In Cold Blood was required reading at Shawnee Mission North High School in Mission, Kansas, in the early 1970s. One day a young man was so affected by doing his homework that he dropped the book to the floor, and staggered out of the classroom in a daze. He had figured out, from reading the book, something that his family had never told him. His father was Richard Hickock. He was a baby at the time of the crime. His mother had long since re-married, and he had been adopted many years earlier. But he knew his grandmother, and he pieced the facts together after he saw her name in the book."

At this point in the story, we introduce my sister - who I'm proud to say is the former president of the Shawnee Mission School Board. I'm not sure she was out of college at that point, and was 10 years from even moving to Kansas, so she obviously had no influence on the selection of books in the schools at the time.

I recently read this story to her, and she had never heard it. I mentioned that if she still had any influence with the Shawnee Mission School Board, she should suggest much calmer reading for the today's students. Personally, I think "Rayzor's Edge" by Rob Ray would be the perfect choice. And considering that copies probably can be purchased cheaply out of the remander bins of stores, the school district and its taxpayers could save some money. Talk about a win-win!

All right, the shameless plug is over.

Be notified of new posts via Twitter @WDX2BB.

Unpopular premise

Want to see a blogger become unpopular in no time?

Here's one method - suggest that Darcy Regier is not the source of all of the Buffalo Sabres' problems, and that firing him at the end of the current season is no sure cure.

Here goes.

The Sabres have been a major disappointment again this season. Hopes were high when Terry Pegula bought the team, but so far the franchise hasn't been able to capitalize on the new approach and turn it into wins - or more to the point, playoff wins. A few players have been sent packing recently for various reasons, so the roster is more or less out of scapegoats there. Coach Lindy Ruff was sacrificed to the hockey gods earlier this season. That has helped a little in terms of won-loss record, but a playoff berth seems unlikely.

Housecleanings of the front office are always popular. They are a sign of action, and people like action in such circumstances. The media members like it, because it creates news. Fans like it, because everyone likes to play general manager ... although I don't think actually being one would be the least amount of fun.

Appropriate here? Much harder to say. Let's ask some questions.

What's the easiest way to get fired as a general manager? Not get along with the people above you, naturally. Ask John Muckler. Heck, ask Scotty Bowman, who drastically changed the team's front office culture and is still hated for it. We've had a variety of people involved in Sabres' ownership since Regier arrived in 1997. They all seem to think that Regier has done a good enough job to hang on to his position, and done it in a variety of circumstances - from bankruptcy to unlimited riches. A lot of people who see him work on a daily basis, up close, have been impressed. He's been a good soldier, taking the blame for organizational faults at times. Stability is also a virtue, and he's certainly provided that over the years. That's all worth something.

How is his record? The answer is mixed. It looks as if the team is about to go two straight seasons without making the playoffs, and six straight seasons without winning a playoff series. That's not a good sign, and some may want to stop here and show Regier the door. But the team was in the conference finals in two seasons before that, and probably was one healthy defenseman away in 2006 from winning the Stanley Cup. Before that, there were three years of sitting home in late April, and nothing but playoff appearances before that. It's not consistent excellence like the Detroit Red Wings' ledger, but it's not the Columbus Blue Jackets.

Are there extenuating circumstances? Absolutely. Bankruptcy is never a good sign, and we'll never know what working conditions were like in that era. We do know that a few years later under actual owners, the Sabres cut way back on their scouting budget and watched prospects through video. While the technique was rationalized at the time, it's tough to believe it didn't play a part in the team's problems for the past few years. In other words, the Sabres could be paying for it now.

How have Regier's transactions gone? Stay long enough, and you'll have some successes and failures. This month's housecleaning brought in several high draft choices that could turn out to be helpful in a few years. Know anyone who didn't like Cody Hodgson and Alexander Sulzer for Zack Kassian and Marc-Andre Gragnani? A first-round pick for Paul Gaustad? The original Robyn Regehr traded was helpful. Then again, deals for Brad Boyes and Raffi Torres didn't work out. And so on down through the years. Rarely, though, has a trade been announced and fans thought, "Just what was Darcy thinking there?" Regier supposedly is rather cautious in his negotiations and can be difficult to deal with, but it's hard to know just how true that is unless you are on the phone talking trade or contract with him.

How about free agent signings? Swings and misses. Christian Ehrhoff wasn't a bad pick-up. Ville Leino hasn't worked out so far. You get the idea. Hockey players peak at 25 or 26 for the most part, and free agents become available at 27. You never know how fast they'll slide, and teams often pay for past production that isn't duplicated.

And the ones that got away? I'm not willing to blame Regier for the loss of Chris Drury and Danny Briere once upon a time. Ownership didn't take a pro-active approach to those moves and let them get away. To be fair, Drury and Briere probably didn't earn their inflated salaries elsewhere. Buffalo did match the contract offers for Zach Parise and Ryan Suter last year, but they opted to go to Minnesota for the same money. Hard to complain too much about that.

The draft choices? Ups and downs, as could be expected. Tyler Myers was a fine choice, Marek Zagrapan was not. It's very, very difficult to try to look at an 18-year-old and figure out how he'll be at 23. It's a little easier if you have a top 10 pick. Care to guess how many top ten picks the Sabres had between 1997 and 2011? One, and it was Thomas Vanek. In other words, the Sabres usually haven't been bad enough to get great picks. 

See any slam-dunk reasons there, objectively speaking? I don't.

One of my pet theories about pro sports is that people in leadership positions help their own cause by being available and polished to the public. My Exhibit A was Dick Jauron of the Bills, who everyone said was a nice, brilliant man but who never spoke much and when he did, chose his words so carefully that it was hard to get a read on his personality. Jauron didn't get the benefit of the doubt when things turned bad.

Same here. Regier has always come across as shy to me. The internal drawback is that some people internally have complained about a lack of communication from the GM, which is not good. But more to our point is how Regier has dealt with the public, which is most obvious through the media. The fun in the job for him comes from working with people he likes and trusts, which is why Ruff certainly got the benefits of a few doubts over the years. Lindy had more chances to build up good will with the public since he was on television after every game and practice, but that area isn't Regier's strong suit.

So ... what do we have here? Certainly Regier's departure would be taken by many fans that ownership is willing to try new approaches to win. It's an ideal time to do that in the sense that a new GM could bring in his own coach in the offseason, as well as make other front-office moves.

But would it help? Is there someone obviously better equipped waiting at the door? That's a tough call. Sports teams win or lose for a reason, and usually the reason isn't obvious. When I worked for the Sabres from 1986 to 1992, I saw first-hand that the team's biggest problem was what I called "a commitment to mediocrity." In other words, ownership wasn't prepared to go the extra mile to win a championship; it was relatively content to have a competitive team. This may remind you of the Golisano years with the Sabres, when breaking even was a major goal.

You never know how any architect of a sports team will do in a particular set of circumstances. Glen Sather won a bunch of Cups in Edmonton, but has been blanked in New York while spending lots of money. Harry Sinden never won a Cup as a GM in Boston, although his teams won plenty of games. There are just too many variables to predict future results.

I guess I'd have to see have some good evidence from the inside that shoving Regier out the door would be helpful before pulling the trigger. That's mostly because change for the sake of change isn't necessarily a good idea.

Be notified of new posts via Twitter @WDX2BB.

Boo boo

Steve Ott caused a bit of an uproar this morning when he described the Sabres' fans booing of his team on Sunday night as "completely ridiculous." I immediately had a bit of a flashback to the 1995 season, I think.

The Sabres had just completed a relatively dreary loss at home, the latest in a series of so-so efforts. I was talking to Wayne Presley, a veteran who had been around the block and for the most part was a very logical, insightful interview. I'm not sure how the subject came up, but someone asked about the fan reaction - which was not overly polite.

The response surprised me. It was something along the lines of "Nobody believes in us, only the guys in the locker room are behind us, we'll just have to get this done for ourselves."

I realized that this could be personally harmful to his popularity, and that it was uncharacteristic of him, so I did something I haven't really done before or since. I gave him a chance to bail out. I said something like, "Wayne, in fairness, the team hasn't played well lately, and the fans have filled the building and been generally supportive. Don't you think it was just a case of the booing briefly reflecting on the frustration of a bad night?"

Presley didn't take the life preserver. No, he said, everyone's given up on us, so the heck with everyone, we'll do it for ourselves. I included the second quote in my story.

Booing does happen at sports events, mostly at the pro level. When people pay a lot of money to see a game that doesn't have a happy ending, a few - and that's important to remember - are quick to voice their disapproval. Personally, there's usually only one thing that gets me to even think of booing if I'm in the stands, and that's a lack of effort. You don't try, you deserve the worst. Otherwise, I prefer giving the silent treatment.

What Ott needs to remember, even in moments of frustration, is that professional athletes are making a grand bargain. They earn a lot of money at their craft, to the point where it only takes a few years to have a big head start on everyone else when it comes to having no financial worries for the rest of their lives. They are generally treated like royalty, and admired by people in the community. When they do something well, the cheering rings in their ears. And when they don't, it only takes a good play to help to erase those bad feelings.

But there is a downside. The odd boo or remark from the stands is part of that. None of us would like it if, when we made a mistake on the job, we had people surrounding us, yelling a chorus of boos. There can be a lack of privacy and an excess of rumors about your personal life. There even may be criticism in the media based on incorrect information or just plain poor assumptions (hard to believe, I know).

If you don't want to accept that deal, fine. There's a line of people out the door who are willing to take it.

Athletes are never going to win this type of argument with fans. It's better to keep quiet and try to do better next time. Or, maybe say something like, "I felt like booing me too." Those athleties might remember that it's better to have them in the building and caring about the team than sitting at home watching a reality show on television. In that sense, apathy is the biggest boo of all.

Be notified of new posts via Twitter @WDX2BB.