Obviously. But why have the last two articles Gleason wrote on hockey personalities from Buffalo descended into a session to hammer management? The articles that are singular in their topics - such as Sullivan’s column on losing Drury - are tolerable because they don’t smell of a personal agenda.

But when Gleason uses his column to write what seems to be nice articles about Adams and Miller, then turns it into “Regier is an idiot,” it’s an insult to the subjects of the articles, to the readers intelligence, and to journalistic integrity. It’s obvious to many of us that Gleason has allowed this to becomes a very personal issue, as evidenced by his meltdown at the Sabres press conference and subsequent writings. I realize he is writing opinion columns, but when your opinion strolls into the extreme range (ala Ann Coulter, Michael Moore, and others who write in order to get a reaction) it alienates huge chunks of rational people like myself.

So I can accept that there is no organized agenda to “go after” Sabres management, but I can’t accept that some, mostly two, writers are over-the-top extreme in their approach to the subject and have become disconnected with anything resembling rationality.