| Author |
 Topic  |
|
BradTheBadDad
Top Prospect
73 Posts |
 Posted - 07/11/2008 : 16:36:39
|
Alex I don't think you are giving our rivalry with the Americans due credit. It's apparent everywhere you turn.
There's no one we hate losing to more. When it's to the Russians we can stomach it; to the Swedens, it's still bearable. But when it's a loss to the Americans we hate it! Everything about American hockey seems to rub us the wrong way... American teams winning the cup, American style of hockey, ''Americanizing the game,'' ''non-traditional'' hockey markets...
At every level, amateur through pro, we face the Americans. When kids in leagues higher than house league have tournaments (you should know this) it's generally against American teams. I myself have coached at a few minor Can/Am games and the rivalry is nuts!
You seem to think a rivalry needs to be evenly matched to be legit. Many agree with you. I, however, feel that the American / Canadian rivalry, along with the Oilers / Flames' rivalry, deserve to be up there with the best of them. In recent years, the gap has been significantly narrowed in both these cases.
Oh, and you're right: what the hell was the writer thinking when he threw in Lindros, Cherry and the Owners? Dumb, dumb, dumb. 
''Eat. Sleep. Hockey'' |
 |
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 07/12/2008 : 03:21:09
|
The Americans stood up the Canadians on the world stage before many of us were even sperm?? Are you suggesting that most everyone here is 11 1/2 years old and under?? I was under the impression that you were 13 or so.... I am confused
 |
|
|
|
Axey
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
877 Posts |
Posted - 07/12/2008 : 06:59:06
|
| LOL ... oh my, we own hockey there is no debate. The US may have won here and there but lets face reality, Ex- Uruguay won a couple world cups, are they said to be anywhere near Brazil? Negative. But they are good don't get me wrong, but its Canada's sport. |
|
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 07/12/2008 : 07:45:05
|
quote:
Originally posted by Axey
LOL ... oh my, we own hockey there is no debate. The US may have won here and there but lets face reality, Ex- Uruguay won a couple world cups, are they said to be anywhere near Brazil? Negative. But they are good don't get me wrong, but its Canada's sport.
I'm not sure if this is directed at me, and if so ...there is no way a sane hockey person would ever think for a second that the U.S. is winning this rivalry. Sure they might be 'closing the gap' right now, but then you still have 100+ years of recorded hockey history to make up yet.
I was simply referring to a specific tournament 11 1/2 years ago where, in fact, the U.S. did 'sneak' one out (wrongfully so, in my book - sorry Hull, that was a high stick) |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 07/12/2008 : 10:37:31
|
Alex, before you start making comments about Alberta, get a few facts straight.
Firstly, Corner Gas is from Saskatchewan.
Secondly, the rivalry between the Habs and Leafs may be older, but it hasn't had the fireworks of the battle of Alberta in the past 20 or so years. Sure, in the 50, 60, and 70's I would agree that the Montreal vs Toronto rivalry was stellar. However, you would have to thing that most sports writers are not 50+ years old.
The battle of Alberta through the 80's could have arguable been the most heated rivalry in sports history. The games were completely electric, most of them very close, and all had a physicality that you will never see in hockey again.
With all due respect, unless you actually watched any of it, you can not comment.
|
|
|
|
Guest4043
( )
|
Posted - 07/12/2008 : 21:38:19
|
| Battle of ALberta definietly deserves to be high on the list. It was a very heated rivalry in the 80's and is not seeing a big resurgence. |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2008 : 05:26:00
|
July 13, 2008
Who will win the Stanley Cup next year? If any of us knew the answer chances are we’d be kissing the forums goodbye. The writers at Yahoo! released power rankings this week and this much I can tell you: this URL isn’t the golden ticket to WonkaLand.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/news;_ylt=AibybWB9DMWIP.VX2vtea_J7vLYF?slug=rm-nhlpower070708
Detroit and Dallas taking 1-2 is sellable. Detroit is a better team than last year provided they don’t kill the golden goose for its eggs (i.e. play Marian Hossa on the first line.) The Stars are one of those rare teams where the offense, defense, goalie, coach and GM are all underrated. They are quite simply the second best NHL team around.
Past there it’s as dubious as Elisha Cuthbert’s dating choices. Some jump at you: Senators at 16th? The writer points out that this team is the same as last year’s train wreck. Touché, but would that not therefore mean that they are also essentially the same team as the one that came within three wins of the Stanley Cup? You’ll say they lack a goalie; I’ll say they never had one. This team is still one of the best. They probably have the best first line in the NHL, and the best second line centre in Mike Fisher. They have depth and they have character and one crab apple shouldn’t taint the image of the whole orchard.
Lightning at 26th? You mean to tell me the Blues, Leafs, Jackets, Sabres, Coyotes, Canucks, Predators and 20 other teams are better than these guys? Generally my view is you can’t buy a champion, and no, Tampa isn’t going to win two titles in five years. That said, Prospal shouldn’t be considered a new face in town; Malone, Hall, Roberts and Recchi are all character guys coming from the same team; and Olaf Kolzig is a goalie, you don’t need chemistry to stop pucks, you need a noggin. Along with the Hurricanes, these two teams are getting short changed big time.
Calgary at 11th while the Rangers bribe their way into 8th? Look me in the face and tell me that if you had to spend your money earned for writing this baloney article towards gambling on the outcome of the Stanley Cup you would put your eggs in the Rangers’ basket. Does anyone truly believe in this squad? Over in Calgary you have the team with a halo so bright it could make Bryan Berard blind in both eyes. Passion wins games in April.
Alex’s Power Rankings
(Based on who I’d pick to win a playoff series. In brackets is Yahoo’s rank)
1) Detroit (1)
2) Dallas (2)
3) Calgary (11)
4) Anaheim (7)
5) Pittsburgh (3)
6) Philadelphia (5)
7) San Jose (4)
8) Montreal (6)
9) Carolina (17)
10) Ottawa (16)
11) New Jersey (10)
12) Tampa Bay (26)
13) Minnesota (9)
14) New York Rangers (8)
15) Vancouver (19)
16) Boston (15)
17) Chicago (14)
18) Washington (13)
19) Edmonton (22)
20) Colorado (12)
21) Columbus (23)
22) Nashville (18)
23) Buffalo (21)
24) Toronto (24)
25) New York Islanders (28)
26) Phoenix (20)
27) St. Louis (25)
28) Florida (29)
29) Atlanta (30)
30) Los Angeles (27)
Proudly Celebrating Over 50 Blogs and Counting |
Edited by - Alex on 07/13/2008 08:51:38 |
|
|
|
FranzenFanatic
Top Prospect
23 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2008 : 09:03:15
|
are you ouy of your mind? the guy gets paid to write hockey, not you, obviously he knows what he's talkin about unlike some ppl around here
calgary sucks they wont even make the playoffs how can u put them third, id put them in the bottom ten!!! and ottawa?? how many games do they need to lose till you realize they arnet good, holy geez, get it thru your head, the senators are the worst tema in the nhl even behind the threashers
oh and ur the worst fan in the world btw, putting your habs in eighth., lower than what yahoo was generious enuf to give them?? are you kiddin, a real fan says his team will win the cup every year not say they suck
every single yr i say detroit will; win the cup that makes me a REAL fan
if u ask me detroit will win, dallas will be the second best, followed by tampa, edmonton and the rangers,,, and then the pens |
Edited by - FranzenFanatic on 07/13/2008 09:03:54 |
|
|
|
Pasty7
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2312 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2008 : 10:18:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by FranzenFanatic
are you ouy of your mind? the guy gets paid to write hockey, not you, obviously he knows what he's talkin about unlike some ppl around here
calgary sucks they wont even make the playoffs how can u put them third, id put them in the bottom ten!!! and ottawa?? how many games do they need to lose till you realize they arnet good, holy geez, get it thru your head, the senators are the worst tema in the nhl even behind the threashers
oh and ur the worst fan in the world btw, putting your habs in eighth., lower than what yahoo was generious enuf to give them?? are you kiddin, a real fan says his team will win the cup every year not say they suck
every single yr i say detroit will; win the cup that makes me a REAL fan
if u ask me detroit will win, dallas will be the second best, followed by tampa, edmonton and the rangers,,, and then the pens
FF long time no see cant say as i missed you why cant you have an opinion without bashing someone else,,, so by your logic leafs fans should be calling for a cup this year,,, and if they did you would "why wont you leafs fans get it thru your sick skull yadda yadda"
Pasty |
|
|
|
Pasty7
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2312 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2008 : 10:32:58
|
i think you thouroughly underestimate the rangers, and over estimate the Sens,, Fisher best second line center?? I'll name a few 100x better,,, Patrick Malreau, Malkin even plekanec,, tell me guys like Gomez and Drury don;t know how to win in april, Not very many players are better to have on your squad in april then Chris Drury, the rangers have a strong set of forwards a strong young d squad and a terrific goalie they re a contender legit.. i think calgary is going to finish 7th or 8th but still get passed the first round,, Detroit will not repeat someone will figure out all you need is 25 + shots on osgood to score 4 goals,,, Dallas i would have as a legit number 1 i think detroit got a head in that series and dallas just couldn;t climb back but at the end as a whole dallas was the better team
Pasty |
|
|
|
hockster
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
437 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2008 : 12:21:07
|
| i think farely accurate, a couple places could be changed but your top ten is pretty solid |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2008 : 15:18:08
|
I have some time, so let me beat this up a litte. I just left the one's I totally disagreed with.
Alex’s Power Rankings
(Based on who I’d pick to win a playoff series. In brackets is Yahoo’s rank)
3) Calgary (11) Are you ranking a team that scratched their way into the playoffs and lost in the 1st round 3rd in the NHL?? What have they done to improve from 14th??? Might want to look back and notice how many teams you ranked well below had more of very close to the same amount of wins. This is crazy.
5) Pittsburgh (3) Why did Pitt drop?? They were stellar before Hossa showed up. Adding Fedotenko and Satan. I like this team better than the team that lost to Detroit. Fluery and Crosby were hurt a lot last year too.
9) Carolina (17) What??? Again, What?? Add Joni Pitkanen and take away Cole and they move from a team out of the playoffs to a top 10 team?? I can see around 20th.
13) Minnesota (9) Nope. Gaborik plays far better with Demitra and they also lost Rolston. They added Nolan and MA. Bergeron. Also lost their "tough guy" who could actually play a bit of hockey in Fedoruk. Sliding.
14) New York Rangers (8) Far too low. Sure, Jagr's gone. Add Redden, Zherdev, Rissmiller. This team is better than middle of the pack. They are designed for the playoffs. I don't think anyone could argue that the Blueshirts played Pitt the best of any team in the East.
15) Vancouver (19) What?? Vancouver will be a bottom 5 team. You have to do more than stop the puck to win. There is no scoring on this team.
24) Toronto (24)Worst team in the league. No offense. Horrible last year and they will not have their top scorer?? #1 draft pick coming.
26) Phoenix (20) Will surprise a lot of people. Gretzky is quitely putting together a scoring jugernaut in the desert. Not sure if they can play any defense
|
|
|
|
hockster
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
437 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2008 : 16:04:26
|
| Its hard to say how new acquisitions will play in a new area, and these are just predictions. A team like calgary has gotten better this year, and will have more consistent scoring. In a weakened division they will have a better seeding in playofs. Against San Jose the problem was scoring and goaltending. There D were unreal. Added more scoring, got rid of the people who were dependent on how others played. Expect a bounce back year from Kipper, not 3 but top 10 for sure |
|
|
|
Pasty7
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2312 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2008 : 16:33:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by hockster
Its hard to say how new acquisitions will play in a new area, and these are just predictions. A team like calgary has gotten better this year, and will have more consistent scoring. In a weakened division they will have a better seeding in playofs. Against San Jose the problem was scoring and goaltending. There D were unreal. Added more scoring, got rid of the people who were dependent on how others played. Expect a bounce back year from Kipper, not 3 but top 10 for sure
not to mention another huge Iginla year if Iginla can find a way to improve on last years performance (an mvp performance) he is the kind of player that can carry the flames past any team in the nhl,, i agree with all of what beans has said i wouldn't have the flames quite so low ,, more like 6th i think they're a clutch chemistry team
Pasty |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2008 : 22:47:48
|
I think the Lindros vs Bobby Clarke feud was way better than Lindros vs Quebec, that was media gold!
To belittle the feud in the 80's between Edmonton and Calgary is just ridiculous...the intensity of that rivalry in the short period when it was at it's peak, does indeed rival any other feud built on history. In the mid 80's the playoff series between the Oil and the Flames were often beter than the finals themselves...Messier vs Otto, Peplinski vs his own talent , Steve Smith helping Calgary win a cup they couldn't get themselves .....ahhh the memories.. |
|
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2008 : 03:42:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by fat_elvis_rocked
Steve Smith helping Calgary win a cup they couldn't get themselves.....ahhh the memories..
Just keep in mind that Steve Smith did not, in fact, help Calgary win a cup at all. His "own goal" happened in '86, while Calgary's cup win was in '89 |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 07/15/2008 : 17:14:38
|
July 15, 2008
‘When you got it, flaunt it/ Step right up and strut your stuff’ -The Producers
As the Swedish diva parades around Bialystock’s New York flat, it’s pretty clear that the lights are on but nobody’s home. The words are still true, though: society is peppered with a crop of individuals who just can’t do any wrong even if they tried. There are guys with oodles and oodles of talent, to the point that they don’t know what to do with their time. Case in point, Ken Dryden.
Let’s not allow the s*** to hit the fan here, but if someone off the street told you that Dryden was the best goalie ever to play in the NHL, he’d be justified in saying so. Dryden has a regular season winning percentage of .790, six Stanley Cups in eight years, and five Vezinas in seven years eligible – unparalleled in his field. So what the heck is a guy like that doing retired at age 32?
Well, he also happened to be an intellect of the highest stature. He chose to let a career that was just hitting its prime grind to a screeching halt in favour of books. Huh? Yup. Whereas most of us would hire an accountant to count our blessings if we were as good at hockey, he ‘threw it away’ for other ‘trivial pursuits.’ This is a guy that had law exams rescheduled so that he could play in NHL playoff games. Quite something, eh? Too bad he's a Liberal...
It actually fires a pretty good debate for those hypothetical-junkies in the crowd. If you were the best in the NHL and also had the credentials to pursue other life paths, what would you do? Assuming you were on the brink of breaking the Great One’s records but also had a chance to go on a first-of-its-kind mission to mars, where would your loyalties lie? If you could be the goalie for a team poised to win a record sixth straight cup or you had a career in international law calling you, what would you choose? Many of us are probably listening to the sound of our jaws hit the desk as we wonder why we couldn’t be fortunate enough to face these ‘dilemmas’ ourselves!
It’s tough. There’s gray all over this bad boy, no black and white areas. None of us can claim with 100 percent certainty that we would choose one over the other; that said, I truly believe that I would give up on the NHL glamour and build my legacy in other places. If I could be an Alan Dershowitz or land a seat in the UN or join a scientific expedition or some other sort of high-profile position like that, I’d have to be smoking kilos of narcotics not to take that chance. Couple reasons why:
1) The NHL is the NHL; the greater good is rooted in the other job. There are enough bonehead politicians lying to our faces and pretending to care about us out there; if I get a chance at power, I embrace it like I embrace my momma! 2) If I was really good enough to break the records, my good buddies on PickUpHockey will always play the hypothetical card to defend my case. ‘If Alex would have played longer…’
Ken Dryden is an inspiration to us all. Thoughts?
Proudly Celebrating Over 50 Blogs and Counting |
Edited by - leigh on 07/15/2008 17:19:09 |
|
|
|
BradTheBadDad
Top Prospect
73 Posts |
Posted - 07/15/2008 : 17:43:30
|
Very thought provoking and well-written as usual! I must humbly disagree completely however, on a number of points:
1) I don't really care about scientific expeditions, politics, justice and all that. If I could be dictator of the world, well then maybe But I honestly think that one person alone can't make a difference in the democratic world. Even the Prime Minister is a puppet to his party, not to mention the coalitions he has to make just to get anywhere. Half the bills passed are only there to appease another group so that they in turn throw their support to a bill they don't actually like.
2) Breaking an NHL record would be my dream! Imagine being a key part of six straight Cups or breaking Gretzky's records as you mentioned! It's unfathomable!
3) If indeed I was that smart, the world can wait. If it means missing my window of opportunity to go to outer space or win an election, so be it; the average sports career is limited, whereas the political spectrum is open to all until the day they die. I'd like to believe that my last day on this earth comes a long time after I hit 40 and my knees flare up!
''Eat. Sleep. Hockey'' |
|
|
|
FranzenFanatic
Top Prospect
23 Posts |
Posted - 07/15/2008 : 18:10:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
July 15, 2008
If I could be an Alan Dershowitz or land a seat in the UN or join a scientific expedition or some other sort of high-profile position like that, I’d have to be smoking kilos of narcotics not to take that chance.
obviously ur smokin SOMETHIN to think that your smart enuf to be in the u.N. or good enuf @ hockey to play in the NHL and not even that but hav such a huge ego u think u can be grekzys records!!
clearly none of us will ever make it to either of these positions so why the debate? just another stupid hypothetical thing wehn ur ready to talk FACTS come get me
i know more trivie than any of u guys too bad all we do is debate stuff that will never happen in a blu moon |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 07/15/2008 : 19:33:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
...if someone off the street told you that Dryden was the best goalie ever to play in the NHL, he’d be justified in saying so. Dryden has a regular season winning percentage of .790, six Stanley Cups in eight years, and five Vezinas in seven years eligible – unparalleled in his field. So what the heck is a guy like that doing retired at age 32?
Ken Dryden is an inspiration to us all. Thoughts?
First, I'd say the guy off the street who says Dryden was the best goalie ever is not properly looking at the context of Dryden's career. He is not giving enough weight to the fact that Dryden had one of, if not the, best defence corps ever in front of him. Ken Dryden was a great goalie but in my humble opinion he is not even in the running for the greatest goalie ever. Curious what he thinks Alex. Maybe your Dad could ask him sometime.
Secondly, I have no problem with Dryden retiring to pursue other endevours. To each his own. BUT, a byproduct of that decision is that his career results are grossly misleading. His overall stats look way better than they likely would have looked had he played on a Habs team that slipped a couple of steps down in the early '80s. In other words, Alex, the problem is not Kenny's decision. The problem is you - just kidding - but the point is that people, like you I guess, end up thinking he was greater than he actually was as a result of his retiring before the fall of the Hab dynasty.
Edit - There is no question that his story is a very interesting one. As he created that story, I certainly do admire him (when I am not cursing his friggin good fortune compared to some other greats of the game). |
Edited by - andyhack on 07/15/2008 19:38:48 |
|
|
|
leigh
Moderator
Canada
1755 Posts |
Posted - 07/15/2008 : 20:34:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by FranzenFanatic
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
July 15, 2008
If I could be an Alan Dershowitz or land a seat in the UN or join a scientific expedition or some other sort of high-profile position like that, I’d have to be smoking kilos of narcotics not to take that chance.
obviously ur smokin SOMETHIN to think that your smart enuf to be in the u.N. or good enuf @ hockey to play in the NHL and not even that but hav such a huge ego u think u can be grekzys records!!
clearly none of us will ever make it to either of these positions so why the debate? just another stupid hypothetical thing wehn ur ready to talk FACTS come get me
i know more trivie than any of u guys too bad all we do is debate stuff that will never happen in a blu moon
Hey FF, why don't you host a trivia thread since you like it so much. I bet lots of us would participate. Personally I like the hypotheticals, but I also like trivia. GO FOR IT!!! |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 07/16/2008 : 06:15:11
|
Sorry, a little late on the commentary for the Best Hockey Rivalries topic, but I was away . . .
The traditional hockey rivalries they mentioned were ranked pretty well, in my mind. Right now, I would definitely place Battle of Alberta over the Buds/Habs. Heck, I think Tor/Ott is getting closer to being a better rivalry than the Habs one, and definitely should have made the list. Also - no Isles/Rangers? No NJ/NYR? At least one of those should have been included . . .
What actually irked me though, besides the made-up rivalries, was the enormous north american bias in the rankings. No Finland/Sweden? No Czech/Slovak? If they included international rivalries instead of sticking to the the NHL like they should have, then they really should have done more homework on it . . .
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 07/16/2008 : 07:13:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by FranzenFanatic
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
July 15, 2008
If I could be an Alan Dershowitz or land a seat in the UN or join a scientific expedition or some other sort of high-profile position like that, I’d have to be smoking kilos of narcotics not to take that chance.
obviously ur smokin SOMETHIN to think that your smart enuf to be in the u.N. or good enuf @ hockey to play in the NHL and not even that but hav such a huge ego u think u can be grekzys records!!
clearly none of us will ever make it to either of these positions so why the debate? just another stupid hypothetical thing wehn ur ready to talk FACTS come get me
i know more trivie than any of u guys too bad all we do is debate stuff that will never happen in a blu moon
You can't beat me at hockey triv....
Why don't you go over to the triv section and get in the octagon... |
|
|
|
leigh
Moderator
Canada
1755 Posts |
Posted - 07/16/2008 : 10:54:07
|
| I'm conflicted. As I get older I would like to think that I would choose the mature thing and go out and contribute to the betterment of the world....but at 20 to 35 years old....I would probably have played hockey! LOL! |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 07/16/2008 : 14:33:49
|
As you state it, the decision would be to go from being the best in the NHL to going and doing something of a greater societal nature.
I'm thinking, if you are one of the greatest at that current time(Dryden not being the best example), you could serve both purposes by staying and playing.
The overall upside to breaking Gretzky's records, would be as serving as a one-time mission to Mars, in the respect that you would be thrust in to such a huge spotlight, you may actually have a better oppurtunity, in our media/celebrity crazy society, to serve whatever agenda you might have to help improve the world.
Better yet, you would then have the oppurtunity to live an example of life that people would emulate, giving a much bigger contribution back than some funny rocks....
For Dryden to quit when he did to pursue law, was a great move on his part, but if you've got the chance to surpass the Great One, you owe it to fans of the world to continue... |
|
|
|
Guest9874
( )
|
Posted - 07/16/2008 : 15:32:00
|
I've gotta agree with you on this one Alex, the NHL is only important to a couple million people at most, if i have a chance to do nobel-prize worthy work and improve this world than i'd hope my concious wouldn't let me stay in the nhl to satisfy my ego
the greater good comes 1sst |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 07/16/2008 : 16:13:15
|
July 16, 2008
There are those that just can’t admit they’ve hit rock bottom. The Family Guy solution was rather amusing: hire a barber shop quartette to musically inform patients that they have AIDS. The Toronto Maple Leafs have chosen an alternate route. They’re giving out free tickets – 18,819 to be exact.
The banner statement is that they’re reaching out to a new genre of fan. However, it’s pretty clear that MLSE has a hidden agenda: damage control. Richard Peddie knows that his PR levels are lower than those of Lynne Spears Sr. (can you believe that woman has the audacity to write a parenting book?) Personally speaking, I don’t give a flying rat’s ass about this guy or his regime. He can pogo-stick to Timbuktu and back – until the Leafs stop stinking up the league, it doesn’t make an inch of difference.
No fan will fall for this promotional gimmick. Even if the Maple Leafs were successful in recruiting young new hopefuls, the hopes would be shot down like an American aircraft over Cuba when the Leafs get creamed by the Sabers. When will the Leafs, or any other team, learn that the game should be calling first dibs on shot-gun, not the marketing.
Then again, monkey see monkey do, right? Gary Bettman has all but sent an invitation to all thirty franchises to do the same by stealing the spotlight of the off-season and centering it on one game that won’t even be taking place for another five months and change. And frankly, I’ve got to question this Winter Classic. Wrigley Field? Why on God’s green earth? Isn’t the NHL trying to distance itself from other pro-sports? And honestly, the Red Wings and Black Hawks? OK so they’ve played more regular season games than anyone, do we care about the price of tea in China?
I can appreciate the fact that the NHL is using the game to appeal to ‘new’ fans, even though I’d much rather the best game of the year be played on Canadian soil. However, since the league is already doing its real fans a disservice by icing the game in the U.S., couldn’t they at least try to make the game interesting? They should have teams that always end up playing end-to-end matches when they square off featured in the Winter Classic. One that pops to mind is Minnesota-Colorado. Even take it a step further: why not play the best games possible, like Ottawa-Montreal or Calgary-Edmonton. Those games are always wide open with a bad blood on both sides and good hits. So what if the teams are Canadian, it’s the game that counts…
Those ideas were admittedly highly unorthodox, but hey, I’m just chicken scratching over here. John Lennon was right when he said he wasn’t the only one; I, too, am a dreamer.
Proudly Celebrating Over 50 Blogs and Counting |
Edited by - Alex on 07/16/2008 18:54:03 |
|
|
|
BradTheBadDad
Top Prospect
73 Posts |
Posted - 07/17/2008 : 03:40:15
|
Laughing myself the whole way through! 
I tend to agree, MLSE is being stupid. They're not going to get new fans, their PR isn't going to go up, it isn't going to make the team any better... if I'm them, I look at this as a golden opportunity to rake in more revenue. Giving away tickets won't help anyone.
And regarding the Winter Classic, I don't neccesarily mind the venue as much as the teams involved. I think that a lot of MLB fans may want to watch the game just because it's taking place in one of their more cherished ballparks. That being said, I too wish it was a better game than Detroit-Chicago. 
''Eat. Sleep. Hockey'' |
|
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 07/17/2008 : 11:40:26
|
| Can you elaborate as to why Det-Chic is not a good match-up?? |
|
|
|
Pasty7
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2312 Posts |
Posted - 07/17/2008 : 16:30:04
|
Chi town is a great hockey town,, two original six teams squaring off infront of 20 000 die hard fans, i feel like chuggin a beer and painting my face just thinking about it, hockey is far more then just Canada the their have been three outdoor games and 1 of the three was in Canada , Detroit is the best team to watch play the game of hockey they move the puck like noone else,, again the best team in hockey vs, a great up and coming divisional rival for as long as the NHL has been in existance,,, grab the two four of coors it hockey time is what i say!!!
Pasty |
Edited by - Pasty7 on 07/18/2008 07:01:40 |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 07/18/2008 : 13:56:16
|
Mostly agree with you Alex, except for one thing:
Detroit Chicago will be a great game.
You must have missed the games those two teams played last year, otherwise you wouldn't be saying that . . . I was lucky enough to see only one, but it was pretty darn good, with the young Chicago rookies running and gunning at stages and it was end to end stuff - which is impressive, considering Detroit rarely allows for that. Plus, Chicago played Detroit the best of anyone in the league for some reason! Nah, I'm all for Detroit and Chicago playing.
Wrigley field, on the other hand . . . that's stupid. Oh, can you imagine them setting up on the St.Clair river or something? That would be sweet . . . would never happen, but it'd be way cool.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 07/18/2008 : 15:16:09
|
I think Wrigley Field is an amazing choice. Especially if the NHL makes one of the boards the brick wall in the outfield!!!
All kidding aside, there are few stadiums in North America that have a more storied history that Wrigley. I think it's a great choice.
Two original 6 teams, another great choice.
Two teams that appear to have high octane offenses, another good choice.
The only thing I would like better is Canadian Teams and a Canadian City, but Wrigley Field in Chicago is a pretty good choice. |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 07/18/2008 : 15:29:19
|
July 18, 2008
Pardon the disturbing analogy, but the NHL is a lot like a Hollywood has-been: even when it should no longer be relevant it manages to retain our attention. Lucky for us bloggers, that means tons to write about. The hot-button topic at the moment is the schedule, and everyone has their opinions so it figures The Alex Blog is entitled.
The tweak that jumps right off the calendar at you is the amount of inter-division play (down to 6 games per divisional rival from 8.) There’re a couple key arguments for and against the change. One of them is that fan bases located in non-desirable areas as far as the schedule is concerned were missing out on watching Sidney Crosby and Alex Ovechkin. That’s a fair assessment, but if you stop and think about it only 18,000 odd people actually can attend a home game at one time. Therefore, 18, 000 benefit while fans who watch hockey on their T.V. religiously don’t derive any pleasure. By no means should a large number like 18,000 be written off, but I’m just pointing out the little touch of discrepancy.
Another point pro-new version is that some divisions are weaker than others and teams can stockpile points playing nearly half their schedule against garbage rosters. That is definitely a legitimate point. I will say this: the team this theory applies to the most is the Detroit Red Wings, and remind me who won the cup again? If a team is getting a free-ride in the post-season, they will get knocked out when they meet the good teams and that is the end of that. On the other hand, you could argue that the Edmonton Oilers missed the playoffs because they didn’t get to play as many games against Central teams like Columbus and St. Louis as Detroit did. Once in the playoffs, you could argue, they would have beaten the Red Wings (hey, it happened once! Remember 2006?) This is definitely one of those points that get the fans screaming blue murder, and deservedly so. Maybe the borderline teams will benefit from the new schedule. For myself, I liked the old way because of the way it promoted old-school rivalry and made every game all that more important.
Part two coming your way tomorrow or shortly thereafter.
Proudly Celebrating Over 50 Blogs and Counting |
Edited by - Alex on 07/18/2008 15:29:53 |
|
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 07/19/2008 : 02:50:19
|
Oh, poor Alex...you fell for it.
I can't believe you didn't see the stats during the season! Or, worse yet, I can't believe you didn't look it up to confirm it before you put your journalistic neck on the block.
As MANY people were saying exactly what you were saying in this last post (about Detroit getting the advantage of being in a weak division) a quick perusal of the divisional records showed that both Nashville and Chicago had better divisional records than Detroit this year!
Teams that earned more divisional points than Detroit this year: Montreal, NYR, Minnesota, Washington, Carolina, Colorado, Nashville, Chicago, Phoenix, San Jose, Anaheim.
Teams with the same number of divisional points this year as Detroit: Ottawa, Philly, Dallas.
So 14 teams had the same number, or more, of divisional points as Detroit this year. And 15 had less. That puts Detroit right in the middle of the pack on this one.
Therefore, they received no extra standings boost by being in the division that they were in.
Now keep in mind that I am not arguing that they weren't a dominant team. By all means they were. But bear in mind that they did not receive a ballooned number of points simply by being in the division that they were in. They actually had an average performance within their division when compared to the rest of the league. This means that they had an even more extraordinary league-wide record to overcome this.
By the way, I am NOT a Detroit fan (or hater, for that matter). I am just looking at the stats and seeing what they are telling me. |
|
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 07/19/2008 : 02:53:29
|
Oh, poor Alex...you fell for it.
I can't believe you didn't see the stats during the season! Or, worse yet, I can't believe you didn't look it up to confirm it before you put your journalistic neck on the block.
As MANY people were saying exactly what you were saying in this last post (about Detroit getting the advantage of being in a weak division) a quick perusal of the divisional records showed that both Nashville and Chicago had better divisional records than Detroit this year!
Teams that earned more divisional points than Detroit this year: Montreal, NYR, Minnesota, Washington, Carolina, Colorado, Nashville, Chicago, Phoenix, San Jose, Anaheim.
Teams with the same number of divisional points this year as Detroit: Ottawa, Philly, Dallas.
So 14 teams had the same number, or more, of divisional points as Detroit this year. And 15 had less. That puts Detroit right in the middle of the pack on this one.
Therefore, they received no extra standings boost by being in the division that they were in.
Now keep in mind that I am not arguing that they weren't a dominant team. By all means they were. But bear in mind that they did not receive a ballooned number of points simply by being in the division that they were in. They actually had an average performance within their division when compared to the rest of the league. This means that they had an even more extraordinary league-wide record to overcome this.
By the way, I am NOT a Detroit fan (or hater, for that matter). I am just looking at the stats and seeing what they are telling me.
Oooops! |
Edited by - 99pickles on 07/20/2008 01:48:17 |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2008 : 05:36:25
|
July 20, 2008
On a class field trip to Queen’s Park in grade four our teacher challenged us to think of the one ‘no-no’ that can get you tossed out of Parliament. Every student took turns conjuring up the most vile, disgusting obscenity imaginable, to no avail. And then we were finally put out of our misery: the four letter word is ‘liar.’ The world of sport has its own equivalent. For the NHL, MLB, NBA and NFL, the elephants on the dining room table are cheaters.
There’s your run-of-the-mill quacks, which use banned substances, read playbooks or fake their way onto the foul line. And of course, the sports try as best they can to eliminate unfair advantages of any kind. But hockey, a sport that invites physical contact, is even more susceptible to cheating. In the NBA if Shaq decided to suddenly send Steve Nash airborne, he’d get tossed right away. In the NHL, the poor sucker would get his butt off the floor and shake it off. So how do you cheat in a sport that allows what is, relative to other pro sports, evidence to get you thrown out of the league indefinitely? Cheap shots. There are con artists all over the NHL who will take a guy out a la New York City mugger while the ref is picking his nose, and nothing is done.
And so the debate begins. I fondly remember one of my many coaches who had the responsibility of leading a team of impressionable eleven year old boys. We were down two games to none in a best of five final. His last words as we left what would become the final practice of the season: ‘Hey, if you cheat a little it just means you care more, right.’ Oh, I see. So it’s a matter of semantics than, is it? It’s not that Barry Bonds is cheating by beefing up artificially while the rest of the league spends hours at the gym – it’s that he cares more. And apparently caring is a crime worthy of being indicted by a Grand Jury? It all makes perfect sense now. 
Let me make my position perfectly clear: if you’re a cheater you’re a bastard. All this garbage about ‘head-hunting’ and ‘diving’ can lick my rear end. If a team needs to cheat to win than it’s complete baloney. What does it say if the only way to win is by resorting to tactics outside the scope of the rulebook? Do you feel good winning by cheating?
This argument isn’t even up for grabs in my opinion. Cheating is non-negotiable. Where the problem lies, IMO, is what happens if a team were to actually take my advice and find themselves losing to a team that dives and head hunts. What do you do when you’re trying to play it fair and the other team is winning because of it? Do you take justice into your own hands and decide to fight fire with fire? Do you stick to your morals, and say that two wrongs don’t make a right?
Let me know your thoughts, I will reply in my next blog. Tell me what type of cheating is ‘OK’ and what type isn’t and let the debate begin!
Proudly Celebrating Over 50 Blogs and Counting |
Edited by - Alex on 07/21/2008 04:07:19 |
|
|
|
Guest9874
( )
|
Posted - 07/20/2008 : 06:31:28
|
| either no one cheats or everyone does if im losin a game tryin to be nice i dont give a crap about my morales i wanna win and ill cheat to do it (if its good enuf for the other team pls tell me why i should be held to a higher moral standard? oh, and please tell me what the reward is for not cheating,,, losin a cup, maybe? no one notices a team that doesnt cheat, the guys who get attention win championhsips) |
|
|
|
BradTheBadDad
Top Prospect
73 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2008 : 09:36:28
|
I think that cheating will never be fully dealt with in any environment in the world, let alone sports, let alone hockey. To win, you need to cheat. It's a sad fact, but good guys finish last.
That being said, here's my list of ''fine'' and ''not fine'' cheating:
Fine
Illegal sticks
Too many men
Clutch and grab stuff
Instigating
(Doesn't really qualify as cheating per se...) Gambling.
I know that last one is controversial, but I don't see any problem with gambling as long as you don't gamble against your own team. Someone please explain to me the fundamental problem, other than throwing the old ''it's illegal'' at me. That's probably one of the most counterproductive rationales.
Not Fine
Dives
Head-shots
Cheap shots
Steroids
There's probably more to both sides of the argument, but those are the major ones for me.
''Eat. Sleep. Hockey'' |
Edited by - BradTheBadDad on 07/20/2008 09:36:53 |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 07/21/2008 : 14:51:42
|
July 21, 2008
OK, so that cheating debate took off about as much as Ahmidinejad’s Photo Shopped missile. Like Hallmark-hopeful Longfellow Deeds once said ‘it’s the thought that counts!’ Anyways, for today I’m going to talk about something completely out of left field so giddy up partner! Today we’re going to look at coasters (no, not the ones you serve coffee on to your in-laws.)
During my first stint on a select team, the entire emphasis was on skating. The program and all practices revolved around fast, powerful strides and getting from point A to B before the next guy.
Then I moved teams, and it was like a culture shock. I could skate circles around them… the only problem was, I could do diddly-squat with the puck. I kid you not when I say that every single shift I was going 100 percent both ways of the ice but rarely ever touching the puck. When I did, I was too dogged to do much anything with it. And on a shift where I laid a guy out or had myself been hit – f’get about it!
It actually pissed me off a little and I started studying the other kids from the bench. One kid in particular seemed like he had a lobotomy for half the game, but suddenly when the puck was on his stick he was off to the races. He plays a hell of a lot like Evgeni Malkin: big, strong, soft hands, goes full out once a shift and plays slower paced - but still defensively sound - for the rest of the time. At that point I realized that smart hockey doesn’t mean fast hockey.
You see, for about eighty percent of the shift there really is no reason to be skating at top speed. Even during an odd man rush (both ways of the ice) you don’t ever need to be going as fast as the puck carrier. As long as you pick up your man (defensively) or find open ice (offensively), it doesn’t have to be at break neck speeds. The odd time I do go full-throttle, I blow by the guy before he sees what happened.
According to the new style of play I’ve adapted, I only go full out if I can turn a breakout into an odd-man rush or if I’m the last man back. Other than that I just let the play develop and find my task on the ice. It’s made me a much better player all around, left me with much more gas in the tank, and all of a sudden I’m lighting it up like a Christmas tree.
Let me know what you think and let the readers know your tips for how you play.
Proudly Celebrating Over 50 Blogs and Counting |
Edited by - Alex on 07/22/2008 04:18:34 |
|
|
|
Pasty7
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2312 Posts |
Posted - 07/23/2008 : 09:01:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
July 21, 2008
OK, so that cheating debate took off about as much as Ahmidinejad’s Photo Shopped missile. Like Hallmark-hopeful Longfellow Deeds once said ‘it’s the thought that counts!’ Anyways, for today I’m going to talk about something completely out of left field so giddy up partner! Today we’re going to look at coasters (no, not the ones you serve coffee on to your in-laws.)
During my first stint on a select team, the entire emphasis was on skating. The program and all practices revolved around fast, powerful strides and getting from point A to B before the next guy.
Then I moved teams, and it was like a culture shock. I could skate circles around them… the only problem was, I could do diddly-squat with the puck. I kid you not when I say that every single shift I was going 100 percent both ways of the ice but rarely ever touching the puck. When I did, I was too dogged to do much anything with it. And on a shift where I laid a guy out or had myself been hit – f’get about it!
It actually pissed me off a little and I started studying the other kids from the bench. One kid in particular seemed like he had a lobotomy for half the game, but suddenly when the puck was on his stick he was off to the races. He plays a hell of a lot like Evgeni Malkin: big, strong, soft hands, goes full out once a shift and plays slower paced - but still defensively sound - for the rest of the time. At that point I realized that smart hockey doesn’t mean fast hockey.
You see, for about eighty percent of the shift there really is no reason to be skating at top speed. Even during an odd man rush (both ways of the ice) you don’t ever need to be going as fast as the puck carrier. As long as you pick up your man (defensively) or find open ice (offensively), it doesn’t have to be at break neck speeds. The odd time I do go full-throttle, I blow by the guy before he sees what happened.
According to the new style of play I’ve adapted, I only go full out if I can turn a breakout into an odd-man rush or if I’m the last man back. Other than that I just let the play develop and find my task on the ice. It’s made me a much better player all around, left me with much more gas in the tank, and all of a sudden I’m lighting it up like a Christmas tree.
Let me know what you think and let the readers know your tips for how you play.
Proudly Celebrating Over 50 Blogs and Counting
when i coach the kid thats not giving it his all on a 30 second shift A. because if he can't go all out for 30 to 45 seconds he needs some time on the bike and couple km's of joggin or B. Is a lazy sob and would have been cut at training camp,, you have 45 seconds obviously if you're in the defensive zone you lock on to your man or zone you were designated to defend but once your d man has the puck you're suppose to be flying out into the neutral zone i always tell my d man never pass to a stationary target or a target thats going nowhere fast you should be rolling when the puck hits your stick thats how you rush d man and captalize on mistakes,, again the idea of saving energy on a 30 to 45 second shift doesn't make sense to me
Pasty |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Canada - Russia rap 
