| Author |
 Topic  |
|
I´m also Cånädiön
Rookie
Sweden
217 Posts |
 Posted - 07/23/2008 : 14:01:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
July 21, 2008
At that point I realized that smart hockey doesn’t mean fast hockey.
I have to agree with pasty on this one, the short time you are on the ice you should be able to go full throttle all the time. However smart hockey isn´t always fast hockey as you said. Smart hockey would be an entire teams ability to quickly change the game speed back and forth by will. This way a puck-control type of team can take away momentum and control the game against it´s opponents. The Czech national team is usually good at this type of hockey.
BTW I feel pretty good right now, just went through 2/3 of the Classic Six with a friend if anyone here appreciate good whisky. |
 |
|
|
Pasty7
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2312 Posts |
Posted - 07/23/2008 : 15:15:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by I´m also Cånädiön
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
July 21, 2008
At that point I realized that smart hockey doesn’t mean fast hockey.
I have to agree with pasty on this one, the short time you are on the ice you should be able to go full throttle all the time. However smart hockey isn´t always fast hockey as you said. Smart hockey would be an entire teams ability to quickly change the game speed back and forth by will. This way a puck-control type of team can take away momentum and control the game against it´s opponents. The Czech national team is usually good at this type of hockey.
BTW I feel pretty good right now, just went through 2/3 of the Classic Six with a friend if anyone here appreciate good whisky.
haha i do enjoy my whiskey only because when we were younger all we could get our hands on was jack daniels,,,, mmmmmmm its an addiction,,,,
Pasty |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 07/23/2008 : 17:07:14
|
July 23, 2008
-dedicated to I´m also Cånädiön
Tick-tock. As the hours turn into days and the days into weeks, it’s becoming increasingly aggravating to wait for the Sundin camp to release a statement of any kind. It’s like the husband who has an important dinner date with a client.
-‘Honey, we’re going to be late!’
-‘Does this dress make me look fat?’
Argh! So to pass the time? Instead of playing Eye-Spy, singing about beer on the wall or pretending the problem doesn’t exist (otherwise known as the Obama-approach) let’s take a look at one of the components of Sundin’s legacy, the captaincy.
Chances are high that my face will be plastered on ‘Wanted’ posters all over Toronto tomorrow morning, but I think that ‘captain’ and ‘leader’ are two worlds unto themselves: and Mats Sundin wasn’t originally cut out for either. By extension of one (captaincy), he was ‘born’ into the position of the other (leader). However, he definitely doesn’t have VIP access to the ‘natural leaders’ clique. Nice and quickly, let me pose this question: what if he had played out the rest of his career on a team other than Toronto? Would you still see him as a leader?
What if he had stayed with the Nordiques franchise? Chances are slim to none he would have won the honours of captain over Joe Sakic. That being said, do you think that without the ‘C’ sewn on to his chest he would be a leader? Before you answer, ask yourself if Peter Forsberg was a leader in the Avalanche dressing room. He was just as good as Sundin if not for the injuries. Both are Swedish, slightly introverted, and incredibly skilled. One goes down as a leader, one won’t. Why? In my opinion, it has everything to do with who got the big break. Mats Sundin got lucky enough to ‘inherit’ the captaincy. If you look at the history of the Maple Leafs, he was only appointed captain when Gilmour was sent packing and Wendel Clark was way past his prime. So all that was fueling his case at the time: possessing more skill than Igor Korolev and his 39 points.
Of course, once he had the ‘C’, people naturally started turning to him. His career with the Buds has been nothing short of brilliant and I’m not looking to slight that. But all I’m saying is, to this day, I don’t see him as a leader. Even those who say he is a leader will point to his clutch plays, his ability to lead the team on the ice. But ask yourselves, how come the Maple Leafs are the most pathetic hockey club in hockey? How come a half-awake Tomas Kaberle is assistant captain? How come Jesse Jackson himself wouldn’t be able to inspire these guys to care about anything? Shouldn’t Mats be able to deliver a stirring talk in the dressing room and wake up these zombies? Shouldn’t the captain of a decade and change command respect for the jersey they wear, the city they live in, the owner they play for and most importantly, the players themselves? He leads on the ice, not off it.
Let me know what you think. Tomorrow (or in the near future) we expand our territory as I take a look at examples of ‘natural leaders.’ Tune in!
Proudly Celebrating Over 50 Blogs and Counting |
Edited by - Alex on 07/24/2008 04:16:12 |
|
|
|
BradTheBadDad
Top Prospect
73 Posts |
Posted - 07/23/2008 : 18:06:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
Before you answer, ask yourself if Peter Forsberg was a leader in the Avalanche dressing room. He was just as good as Sundin if not for the injuries. Both are Swedish, slightly introverted, and incredibly skilled. One goes down as a leader, one won’t. Why? In my opinion, it has everything to do with who got the big break. Mats Sundin got lucky enough to ‘inherit’ the captaincy. If you look at the history of the Maple Leafs, he was only appointed captain when Gilmour was sent packing and Wendel Clark was way past his prime. So all that was fueling his case at the time: possessing more skill than Igor Korolev and his 39 points.
Wow. I can honestly say before I read that paragraph I was unable to concieve anyone ever questioning his leadership. People say he isn't a leader or a true lover of the Leafs because he didn't waive his NTC, I say hogwash, he bleeds blue and white.
That being said, you raise some valid points about his ''leadership'' per se. Peter Forsberg is no different than Mats, other than he wasn't a captain. No one thinks of him as a leader. And also, this is a very good point you make: if he's such a great ''leader'' why do the Maple Leafs play the least inspired hockey around??
I've got to give it to you, some very valid points there. He is probably their best ''captain'' ever, and the mental images of all those years of trying will never leave me. He gave it his all. But, he never managed to engage those around him. Who knows what could have been if he was a little more leader-like?
EDIT: Oh yes, and you make a strong argument that a lot of his ''legacy'' fell into his lap just because he was lucky enough to be in the right place (Toronto) at the right time (not many talented players.) After he got the captaincy, it just sort of grew a head of its own.
''Eat. Sleep. Hockey'' |
Edited by - BradTheBadDad on 07/23/2008 18:08:27 |
|
|
|
I´m also Cånädiön
Rookie
Sweden
217 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2008 : 06:26:15
|
Erhm well thanks for dedicating a post to me Alex, even though I can´t say I agree with much, if anything in it.
There is a reason behind why Sundin if available, is immediately appointed captain of Tre Kronor in competiton with guys like Lidström and Jönsson.
Forsberg have never been a leader, the guy is humble and don´t like unnecessary attention. He inspires others by his extreme work ethics and winner mentality instead.
Don´t remember if it was Lemieux or Gretzky who said that the perfect hockeyplayer should have Forsbergs grit, spent some time looking for the dam quote...couldn´t find it though.
And one more thing, in small doses I don´t have anything against political comparisons as a way to personalize and flavour texts, just be careful so they don´t get the upper hand to much. Many forums that are not dedicated to politics alone have complete bans against them.
And against better judgement this will be my one and only political remark on this forum. I´m not a big fan of american politics. But if you want to understand it just ignore the pointless rants and look straight at the campaign contributors (called bribes in more civilized parts of the world) for each candidate as a way to see what to expect from them. For instance if someone is taking money from the weapons manufacturers or/and has stock in said companies expect a war/conflict soon so the president and surrounding people can make a buck. Not a fan of the "all or nothing" two party system either.
|
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2008 : 10:18:08
|
I am in no way a Leaf Fan, but I am starting to feel for Mats Sundin. It seems like every where you turn, his leadership is being questioned, and I don't understand why.
He simply was head and shoulders, the best player, on a bad team for a long time.
He led by example, year afer year, and to question why he was unable to inspire those around him is not fair to him. He DID make marginal players like Tucker better with his leadership, and the only thing that stopped him from getting due recognition for it is the inept management of the Leafs and their questionable signings and drafts.
Forsberg? How can he be a leader, when for what seems like the last umpteen years he's been playing the Peter the Great lotto, how does that show loyalty to teammates?
Whoever, if any team, ends up with Sundin, will be that much better for it, because of the leadership qualities he brings. I only hope it isn't the Leafs, they don't deserve it. |
Edited by - fat_elvis_rocked on 07/24/2008 14:21:36 |
|
|
|
Open_Ice
Rookie
Canada
109 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2008 : 11:01:37
|
I agree that Sundin leads by example but he does not seem like the guy to have some big pump up speech before an important game...or any game for that matter.
Actually I would guess that he leads by example and experience.
I didn't know Sundin was given the captaincy at a time like that...wouldnt that be similar to what is going to happen this upcoming season for Toronto? Someone on the leafs will have to be given the 'C' this season without any shown leadership qualities. That is, unless Toronto decides to go without a captain because who could they pick? |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2008 : 13:26:43
|
Something else I forgot to mention in my earlier defense of Mats Sundin's viabiliity as a leader/Captain.
Steve Yzerman, lauded as one of the best captains in history, was unable to stir his team out of hideous doldrums in the mid 80's
Joe Sakic's early captaincy years with the Nordiques were anything less than stellar....and they both were and are less outspoken than Sundin, yet they get their dithers, as they should, maybe Mats should too....
It's easy to be a leader on a good team, ie' Gretz, Trottier, Avalanche...
much more diificult on a terrible team. I did a quick look at Mats' stats and as far as I can tell there was only one year when he didn't lead his team in scoring...speaks loads of leadership to me... |
Edited by - fat_elvis_rocked on 07/24/2008 14:20:37 |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2008 : 15:43:19
|
Fat Elvis, I can appreciate a lot of what you're saying but the Tucker remark is way out of left field. Darcy Tucker spoke to NHL.com during his quote on quote ''breakout season'' and told them he had a lot of time to reflect on who he wanted to be as a player... and it wasn't the pest he had painted himself as. It had nothing to do with Mats. This was one of those identity crises similar to that of Alexei Kovalev last off-season. To attribute such a personal matter to another person I don't understand, because it had nothing to do with him.
July 24, 2008
With the recent announcement out of the Windy City that Jonathan Toews has been named captain, debate has sparked as to what exactly the credentials should be for the coveted position. No one will argue Jonathan isn’t skilled – he’s definitely cut out from the same cloth as the rest of Chicago’s current elite. What then does the argument revolve around? Most pundits are pointing to the same issue: can you really expect this kid to be taken seriously when Maggie Simpson is older than him? Ay carumba!
Clearly, we see, skill is not the only deciding factor when searching for a captain. The ability to rally a group of individuals towards a common purpose is equally important (and in many cases more so).
To spot a perfect example of this, look no further than Jarome Iginla. Several years before the red tape was actually cut through and he was named captain in Calgary, it was clear (albeit unofficial) that he was running the show. He could do it all – score, hit, block shots, fight… This is the type of guy that would be a leader on any one of the twenty-nine other franchises in the NHL. This is the type of player that doesn’t need the letter on his sweater to affirm what he already knows. Canada’s Men’s national teams bear testimony to this. On teams overflowing with guys who are captains and soon-to-be captains, all point to him as one of the bona fide leaders in the room. He’s the reason another Olympian, Todd Bertuzzi, joined the Flames team. Guys like this are born leaders, regardless of if they wear the ‘C’.
Another example is Sidney Crosby. He organizes post-practice scrimmages, gets on the ice first and off it last, conducts all the interviews with an air of charm and class, leads team outings to pubs and the likes (this was all before he was captain by the way )… in four words, he is Mr. Penguins. To give anyone else the captaincy would be counterproductive, because everyone knows that he is their leader. Again, place him on any team and he is a leader.
But hey, don’t take my word for it. Just because I say there are leaders that aren’t captains, why should you believe me? Let’s look at real-life examples, not hypothetical ones I whip-up. There are oodles of leaders in the NHL that don’t wear the C, many who never have. To make a short list: Martin St. Louis, Kris Draper, Gary Roberts, Mike Richards, Ed Jovanovski… On the flip side, captains who wouldn’t be ‘leaders’ other than statistically if they were on another team: Patrick Marleau, Zdeno Chara, Marian Gaborik, Saku Koivu, etc.
You see, there are born leaders, and those who are leaders only because they’re the captain. The NHL clearly agrees with my line of thinking: it’s the only reason a guy like Tim Taylor is captain while Vincent Lecavalier isn’t. Let me know what you think.
Proudly Celebrating Over 50 Blogs and Counting |
|
|
|
OILINONTARIO
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
816 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2008 : 18:43:55
|
Most people in this world do not aspire to be leaders. Those who demonstrate the ability to be leaders, and also posess the desire to do it are few and far between. It is discouraging to see teams that will run the roster as captains throughout the season, This says to me that this team has no direction. The desire says volumes, and if that's all you got, that's a lot.
The Oil WILL make the playoffs in 2009. |
Edited by - OILINONTARIO on 07/24/2008 18:46:18 |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2008 : 05:10:15
|
Quick comments - Alex, just like Bean's reaction, I am impressed. You do bring up some valid points there, especially about Sundin being in the right place at the right time. That being said, I still think Sundin is/was a very solid leader - he grew into it, but he certainly was. It was a long time ago it seems, but the Leafs did have a couple of good runs with Sundin at the helm, and there wasn't a whole lot else.
Sundin, btw, when playing with the other talented Swedes on a very good hockey team, has been the captain, and an admirable one at that, leading them to a gold medal in 2006. 'Nuff said.
Kaberle should never be an AC.
I'm Also Canadian - great comments on . . . political comments. You're bang on.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2008 : 12:51:13
|
Not exactly sure when I said I was impressed with anything. I am thinking it's a case of avatar assumption. I am now Betman, not Mr. Bean.
Regardless, I still think this is for the most part too long and I barely skim it. When it catches my eye I will comment. For the most part, I do a quick scan and hit the other threads. Unless there is something to argue. |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2008 : 14:30:05
|
Beans, my blogs are consistently under 500 words, usually in the 425-450 word range so I don't think they're that long... How long do you want them to be exactly?
July 25, 2008
On Drew Carey’s comedy improv show ‘Whose Line is It Anyways?’ contestants once had to play out the most ridiculous celebrity endorsements they could think of. Mike Tyson for Enyclopedia Britannica, Michael Jackson for the American Society of Plastic Surgeons… and Brett Favre for the Iowa Chops?
It actually provides the groundwork for an interesting concept. We’ve all heard the success stories of athletes who were faced with a crossroads at high school between football or baseball, baseball or basketball, and so on and so forth. Many have gone on to be leaders in both areas (look up Bo Jackson.) Yet rarely do we hear of a case where our beloved game of hockey is part of the equation. The only hockey player off the top of my head that had a chance at two pro-sports was Chris Drury, the other option being baseball.
Steve Nitzel is likely a little loopy to think that Brett will be joining his team, but he does make a good case that can be applied to other athletes pondering multi-sport professionalism. Steve says that Brett has the expertise necessary to excel because of all the years he has gone through of ‘bone-crushing hits’ and ‘read-and-react plays.’ Clearly this particular case is more than a far cry from anything realistic, but it leads us to believe that one day maybe there will be a hockey player in another pro league.
Logistically speaking the NFL and NBA are ruled out, but can you imagine if one day we saw a player play in the MLB and the NHL? The schedules work out for the most part. If a player is that good, you can bet the clubhouse manager would give him some leeway to play in the Stanley Cup playoffs at the cost of spring training.
Another exciting point is that baseball would significantly help his manual dexterity and hand-eye co-ordination, while hockey would do wonders for his leg power. Oh, and one more benefit: the money in the MLB will make $10 million per year in the NHL look like Monopoly money. Any hockey GM lucky enough to own this player knows that he won’t be negotiating huge contracts or being a pain in the watchamacalit like your average player – he’s there to play for the cup. It’s a win-win-win scenario! As a fan it’d be nuts!
Let me know what you think and if there’s anyone out there who wouldn’t support this type of athlete for whatever reason, write in and let us know your thoughts!
Proudly Celebrating Over 50 Blogs and Counting |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2008 : 15:17:05
|
Hey Alex,
Tom Glavine, baseball great was a pretty decent hockey player;
"Glavine was drafted by both the Los Angeles Kings in the 1984 NHL Entry Draft (in the 4th round, 69th overall—five rounds ahead of future National Hockey League stars Brett Hull and Luc Robitaille), and the Atlanta Braves Major League Baseball organization in the 2nd round of the 1984 amateur baseball draft. Glavine elected to play baseball and made his major league debut on August 17, 1987."
quoted from Wikepedia
Personally, I'm glad athletes generally choose one sport and dedicate themselves to it. As a fan I'd hate to see a player get injured playing one sport and be then a loss for the other sport that they are being counted on to play in.
|
|
|
|
BradTheBadDad
Top Prospect
73 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2008 : 16:18:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by fat_elvis_rocked
Personally, I'm glad athletes generally choose one sport and dedicate themselves to it. As a fan I'd hate to see a player get injured playing one sport and be then a loss for the other sport that they are being counted on to play in.
My thoughts on this:
1) If an athlete was splitting his time between the NHL and another sport, it would be the MLB. If he got injured in baseball, he would never in a million years miss an NHL playoff game because of it, and if he got hurt in hockey, he wouldn't miss an MLB playoff game because of it. Therefore, you have him when you need him.
2) As a hockey fan first, I will take the opportunity to get a good player and say thank-you. It's no secret that baseball gets more money, more glory, and more attention. If he wants to play on my team and can have a positive impact, I appreciate it. If he gets injured during baseball, I have to look at the bigger picture: he could simply have not played hockey to begin with.
''Eat. Sleep. Hockey'' |
|
|
|
Guest9692
( )
|
Posted - 07/25/2008 : 17:19:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
Logistically speaking the NFL and NBA are ruled out, but can you imagine if one day we saw a player play in the MLB and the NHL? The schedules work out for the most part. If a player is that good, you can bet the clubhouse manager would give him some leeway to play in the Stanley Cup playoffs at the cost of spring training.
Well if a player plays in both the NHL and MLB, they'd still be only playing one sport. MLB is a past time, you know like darts, billiards and poker. |
|
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2008 : 19:31:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest9692
[quote][i]
Well if a player plays in both the NHL and MLB, they'd still be only playing one sport. MLB is a past time, you know like darts, billiards and poker.
Hilarious...I love this joke! |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2008 : 18:45:53
|
July 26, 2008
The father, son, and the holy grail? Every player gets a day with the Stanley Cup, and Tomas Holmstrom, in his infinite wisdom, decided to transcend its sacredness by associating a religion with it. Bravo. Most people wouldn’t care at all about reading such a headline, but I do on a number of counts.
Number one, it completely cheapens the ceremony and voids it of all meaning whatsoever. The family whose daughter got baptized in the trophy had this to say to the press:
quote:
‘Me and my wife thought if would be fun to christen our daughter in such a priceless object.’
The obvious problem with such a statement is that, firstly, it turns a life-altering event into a joke. Since when is religion and anything divine ‘fun?’ Is this what religion is? Does the Stanley Cup have the authority vested in it to take away from something that has been revered for millennia? It makes a trophy, the likes of which the daughter herself will likely never care about or have anything to do with, the main event at what should be an occasion directed on one sole purpose. It also means that whenever this daughter looks back on that monumental day, she will remember it for a worthless (in comparison) piece of metal. Is this the way the family wishes to bring up their daughter?
And secondly, since when is the Stanley Cup subject to religious mantra? Why should a trophy that has nothing to do with any religion all of a sudden shift towards one? How will the rest of the league respond? Will we next see the Stanley Cup in Madrassahs, at Bar-Mitzvahs and making public appearances with the Pope? On your day with the Stanley Cup, you celebrate your accomplishment for winning the oldest trophy in North American sports. To do anything but that is not only irresponsible, it begs the question of if you truly appreciate what the trophy represents. It doesn’t represent any one religion, and it certainly isn’t a vehicle through which we should be belittling that which is venerated.
Many people would downplay my remarks as ‘over-the-top,’ but ask those who for years died to uphold their religion if they would appreciate us diminishing the value in such a way. Ask Lord Stanley, who gained popularity by refusing to get involved in the Jesuit Estates Bill, a religious based act, if he would ever have wanted his trophy associated with a particular religion. I think not.
Proudly Celebrating Over 50 Blogs and Counting |
Edited by - Alex on 07/26/2008 19:35:39 |
|
|
|
Guest9870
( )
|
Posted - 07/26/2008 : 19:59:22
|
TBH, gotta say I agree. Your first point is the meat of this argument, but by heck, it's a good one! What the hell are the parents thinking turning a baptism into a carnival?? And yea, Holmstrom should re-evaluate what he does on the one day he has to celebrate with a trophy he's been working towards for five years. I certainly hope we DON'T see Ld. Stanley's mug at Bar Mitzvas and at Madarasahs, it would turn this into a mockery...
So in conclusion I completely and entirely agree with everything you said, with EXCEPTION to your final remark: I don't think Lord Stanley would mind all that much. The rest is great though and should not be considered lightly! |
|
|
|
Leafs Rock Planet
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 07/27/2008 : 05:52:47
|
I couldnt tell if it was Tomas Holmstroms baby being baptized or if it was one of his friends or family members but none the less I really dont see any problem with it besides from a religion stand point where I think, as I think Alex said, it diminishes the ceremony and im pretty sure the church wouldnt accept this un-orthodox(excuse the pun) ceremony.
If you want to do this to your child, then by all meens go ahead but doesnt that make the ceremony a bit different from the rest?
|
Edited by - Leafs Rock Planet on 07/27/2008 05:53:03 |
|
|
|
I´m also Cånädiön
Rookie
Sweden
217 Posts |
Posted - 07/27/2008 : 07:57:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
Ask Lord Stanley, who gained popularity by refusing to get involved in the Jesuit Estates Bill, a religious based act, if he would ever have wanted his trophy associated with a particular religion. I think not.
Sweden is the least religious nation in the world. So I don´t think Lord Stanley would be offended. A baptism is more a tradition for friends and family to get together than a religious thing, it just happens to be in a church. In sweden most people aren´t religious at all, for the few who are it´s a personal thing.
Holmström is a laid back guy and I´m sure he didn´t mean to offend anyone.
A quick skim off the net tells me that this isn´t the first time someone uses the cup for a baptism:
"Sylvain Lefebvre had his daughter baptized in the Stanley Cup in 1996"
Hey is Colorado a religious place? Just wondering cause this guy is going there  (Per Ledin to the left):
[img]http://gfx.aftonbladet.se/multimedia/archive/00212/guldkyssen_212566w.jpg[/img]
|
Edited by - I´m also Cånädiön on 07/27/2008 08:00:46 |
|
|
|
Guest9692
( )
|
Posted - 07/27/2008 : 08:26:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
July 26, 2008
And secondly, since when is the Stanley Cup subject to religious mantra? Why should a trophy that has nothing to do with any religion all of a sudden shift towards one?
Many people would downplay my remarks as ‘over-the-top,’ but ask those who for years died to uphold their religion if they would appreciate us diminishing the value in such a way.
Might want to step away from this topic young man. Religion is just too sensitive for some and a joke to others. In your blog, you say died for religion. I say murderers, torturers, racists, mad men in name of religion. Small example, witch hunts and KKK.
Well in some parts of Canada, hockey is a religion of sorts. If you can define religion, I think the belief in hockey, its players, teams and trophy are more tangible than any deity of any religion. Isn't there an analogy of Stanley's mug as a chalice or the holy grail?
You should do a search on youtube on a George Carlin spiel about Religion. I think the whole rant is titled something like bullsh*t. Funny as hell and reflects what some people think of religion. I think it starts off with media, then to politicians and then to the mother of them all religion. My favorite line goes something like this (I'm paraphrasing, listen to George tell it, much better that way):
"I have an all powerful invisible friend. He knows all, sees all. But he always needs money. Just can't handle the finances ...." - RIP Mr. Carlin. |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 07/27/2008 : 08:47:20
|
Guest9692, as much as I want to stay on the general topic of hockey, I can't let you slight religion like that.
First of all, hockey is not a religion. Please explain to me where you find supernatural claims in the realm of the hockey world? Such a statement is ludicrous and probably meant to frustrate people. I respect that form of debate as I use it often, but you and I both know that hockey is nothing more than a sport, and clearly no one treats it as a religion.
Secondly, while clearly dark periods in history such as the crusades and the Holocaust can be entirely blamed on religion, since when do we judge a concept based on the actions of extremists and fundamentalists? There are many zealots out there who feel it is their duty to 'enlighten' others, some unfortunately resorting to violence as their medium; the fact remains that the vast majority simply wish to live and let live.
For many people, there is no point to life without religion. Religous people would ask all those aetheists out there if they can sleep at night with the belief that after their 80-something years on this world they are destined to decompose under the ground for decades to follow. Many people believe simply on the basis that their must be a higher purpose - for them, any claim otherwise defies logic.
All those who claim not to believe in God simply don't want to think, they don't want to accept that which they can not understand. For the record, even the evolutionists are pointing to a ''higher force'' knowadays... for some reason they're scared to use the word ''God.''
That all aside, the point of my original post is that Tomas Holmstrom did a disservice to many people by belittling a baptism that should not be centered around a sporting trophy. That is the only reason this argument has to do with hockey; the debate is not ''is religion good or bad,'' the debate is ''did Tomas Holmstrom act properly by associating religion with the Stanley Cup, and associating the Stanley Cup with religion.'' While the other debate is probably more fun, I kindly ask you to keep to the topic on hand so that we can ensure clean and organized forums.
Thank-you.
Proudly Celebrating Over 50 Blogs and Counting |
Edited by - Alex on 07/27/2008 08:48:29 |
|
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 07/27/2008 : 09:14:15
|
Alex, you just now exhibited his concern - simply try not to get too religious/anti-religious at all, no matter which side you are on (it is pretty clear which side each of you is on). On this site, at least.
In my profession it is explicitly clear that one shouldn't engage in much discussion about religion or politics.Why? Because neither side will ever budge from their position so it will only end badly.
I, for one, would prefer to keep the religious arguing to a minimum if not removed altogether. It is "Pickup Hockey", after all. |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 07/27/2008 : 11:41:03
|
July 27, 2008
Hey-ho hockey fans, who’s excited for another season of hockey? (Wow, since when do crickets chirp that loud?) Maybe we should get Chris Bosh to make another YouTube video begging fans to cheer, there’s a novel idea! The KHL is soon to become water under the bridge on North American shores, much to the chagrin of the traditional hockey fan. Now if that isn’t a call to the NHL to wake up and smell the roses, please tell me what is? The fact of the matter is NHL rivalries suck nowadays.
The traditional rivalries are fairly lopsided, and even those that manage to weather the storm end up dying out come July 1st. The thing is, the main players in the rivalries are on both ends of the spectrum. A rivalry isn’t a rivalry without the star players, nor is it a rivalry without the instigators. Newsflash: those are exactly the types of players that get shipped around the most nowadays. How can a rivalry retain its vibrancy when it becomes a fashion war? It has nothing to do with the players involved; it’s a façade fueled by the logo on your chest. The KHL provided fans with a light at the end of the tunnel. We were hoping that a new genre of rivalry could be born. Talk was taking over the town about ‘Championship Leagues’ and what have you. Instead, the IIHF had to stick its big nose into the affairs. As the Scooby-Doo tagline goes: ‘If it weren’t for those meddling kids…’ Excuse the poetic license.
So what now? A guest writer on the PuckDaddy blog named Kat Carroll has an interesting solution. She points to college hockey as a source of legitimate rivalry that can stand the test of time. Indeed, no blood is more potent than that between college rivals. I’d venture to say that the Rose Bowl and March Madness draw more American fans than the Super Bowl and whatever it is they call the trophy for winning the NBA. (For the record, it’s called the Larry O’Brien Chapmionship Trophy, but Cabbie on the Street proved that most NBAers themselves don’t even know that!) The question is, why can’t NCAA hockey draw the same crowds? The obvious answer: no Canadian markets.
However, hope is on the horizon as amendments made this January look to see Canadian schools join the festivities. There’s no question that these rivalries would highly outclass their NHL counterparts. For one thing, when you play on your school team you naturally have more will to win than if you’re a Czech representing some team from British Columbia. Secondly, ‘trades’ just don’t happen in College hockey. Thirdly, home-grown talent is seen much more on the college scene than in the NHL. Also, as Kat points out, you have four years to get it done in college hockey, a motivating factor for many athletes. The fan-base is night-and-day – instead of seeing suits and corporate CEOs in the stands, you see kids who love the game and cheer their voice box dead. Oh, and the pep rallies are half the event in college hockey. Kind of makes the whole debate over ice girls look stupid.
Honestly, I’d follow a York vs. McGill rivalry a hundred times closer than the Montreal Europeans against the Toronto Maple Laughs. Who’s with me? (Cue the presidential music!)
Proudly Celebrating Over 50 Blogs and Counting |
Edited by - Alex on 07/27/2008 15:11:46 |
|
|
|
Guest9692
( )
|
Posted - 07/27/2008 : 12:49:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
First of all, hockey is not a religion. Please explain to me where you find supernatural claims in the realm of the hockey world? Such a statement is ludicrous and probably meant to frustrate people. I respect that form of debate as I use it often, but you and I both know that hockey is nothing more than a sport, and clearly no one treats it as a religion.
Well in Montreal for example they have refered to hockey as a religion. Being a Habs fan you should know that. They refer to the Forum as a shrine.
Why does religion need to be supernatural? If a person or group of people are so talented and more than just natural can it not be considered supernatural? If you really want get into this define religion for us all.
Is the natural high of winning such a cherished object after exhaustive effor not like Nirvana? Oh right we are only looking at one religion here.
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
All those who claim not to believe in God simply don't want to think, they don't want to accept that which they can not understand.
Really is what you think atheists think? How about believers of other religions? Can you tell me how they think? Why God? What about other deities? What if I believed in Odin, Isis or Buhdda but not your God? Can you tell me how I think now?
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
That all aside, the point of my original post is that Tomas Holmstrom did a disservice to many people by belittling a baptism that should not be centered around a sporting trophy. That is the only reason this argument has to do with hockey; the debate is not ''is religion good or bad,'' the debate is ''did Tomas Holmstrom act properly by associating religion with the Stanley Cup, and associating the Stanley Cup with religion.'' While the other debate is probably more fun, I kindly ask you to keep to the topic on hand so that we can ensure clean and organized forums.
It doesn't cheapen anything. He allowed a baby to be "bathed" in the cup. It should be an honour for the baby. I mean, don't some people get baptized in a swimming pool? Does it cheapen swimming? What about those who can't afford to find an appropriate water vessel and uses a recycled tin can? Isn't the baptism ceremony as an act more important than the water vessel used?
Believe what you believe. I'm not going to change it. But stay away from it as a topic in the future especially if you are as young as you say you are. |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 07/27/2008 : 13:02:09
|
I am debating the issue of religion vs. non religion, not my religion vs. another religion. I would really rather abandon this, but since you engaged me...
1) No one believes that the point of life, ie. man's mission on this earth, revolves around hockey. No one. That, in a nutshell, is religion. The point of life, a higher purpose than the natural.
2) I do believe that aethiests simply play devil's advocate and say ''well if you can't prove it can't be real'' simply because that is the easy way out. Some aethiests may have documents upon documents backing their case (although it should be noted that science is widely open for error), but the majority just take a quick look at the subject and choose rather than to make a ''leap of faith'' simply to shun anything not factually comprehendable.
3) Out of curiosity, guest, what religion do you think I am? I am not by any means imposing my religion over any other or saying ''if you don't believe in this you are stupid.'' It's a free country. I'll bet you any money you have me pegged under the wrong religion, though. 
On a final note, I've never heard of someone being baptised in a swimming pool but I must say that the whole notion really turns it into a joke. It seems counterproductive, considering baptism is a sign that you care about religion enough to go out of your way, only to make a mockery out of it.
It is on this basis that I find fault in what Tomas Holmstrom suggested.
Proudly Celebrating Over 50 Blogs and Counting |
|
|
|
Guest9874
( )
|
Posted - 07/27/2008 : 16:31:27
|
i would definitely watch nhl hockey over college hockey , i agree the rivalry may be better between college teams but at the end of the day you go to a bar with buds and discuss the leafs and habs, not U. of T. and mcgill.
oh and guys im pretty sure the religion debate has overstayed its welcome, guest you should stop pursuing it |
|
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 07/28/2008 : 03:06:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest9692
don't some people get baptized in a swimming pool? Does it cheapen swimming?
Wow - brilliant! I adore intelligent humour!!
quote:
Originally posted by Guest9692 What about those who can't afford to find an appropriate water vessel and uses a recycled tin can?
More brilliance ....will you please join the site??
quote:
Originally posted by Guest9692 Isn't the baptism ceremony as an act more important than the water vessel used?
And then the true fact....you need to be a member #9692
quote:
Originally posted by Guest9692 Believe what you believe. I'm not going to change it.
Unfortunately this is why we should just stay away from this kind of talk, despite your excellent and humorous rebuttal.
quote:
Originally posted by Guest9692 .... especially if you are as young as you say you are.
With all due apologies to Alex (whom I truly appreciate on this site), I am now in this camp of age-disbelievers. I implore you to either admit your truthful age (or at the very least, that these aren't the posts of a 13 year old...no further explanation required)
Guest #9692, please create an identity...or post under your already-existant identity. These are intelligent comments. |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 07/28/2008 : 04:05:37
|
I posted elsewhere in this blog why you should believe that I am in fact thirteen, check it out if it's worth your while. In a nutshell:
A) What benefit would there be for me to lie about my age? If anything, people tend to take you less seriously when you're a teen talking with adults. And although I don't believe you were active at the time, had you been there when I first started on this site, you would have thought I was younger than thirteen. I have learned a lot in these forums that contribute to my knowledge at this point in time.
B) I'm not a braniac. I just happen to be incredible at Lit. Arts. I got 100 on my past three English exams.
C) I'm going to take a shot in the dark and assume that it's the theology debate that rocked the boat for you. After all, most thirteen year olds don't know how to even spell that word. The truth is, my friends make fun of me because I am so into it. On the bus from camp I have a session called ''theology Tuesday'' with staff double my age, and many times win debates. It also helps that I define myself and my character primarily by my religion as opposed to any other value; for this reason, I feel the need to explore the depths of such an important topic, to make informed decisions. If you stand for nothing, you fall for everything.
Please believe my age. In September, I turn 14. I am currently 13. I would gladly show you my FaceBook profile but I don't add people I've never met in person to more than the limited profile, out of principle. Guess you'll just have to take my word for it
P.S. Please don't sit on the sidelines guys! Will all those who believe I'm thirteen please vouch for me in this thread. I know most of you believe, it's a select few that don't, if they saw you supporting my age as true they'd probably realize ''if all these smart, rational people say so, I guess they must have something...'' |
Edited by - Alex on 07/28/2008 04:43:42 |
|
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 07/28/2008 : 11:05:44
|
Okay, okay...I believe you now.
Your explanation appears heartfelt and passionately honest. I was becoming an age-disbeliever and now I realize that I am not concerned about it - just like before.
By the way, I was always on here reading even when not posting, therefore I saw the "Alex's Age" thread long ago but didn't care at all about the issue (I never look at members' profiles and care very little of their ages and locations - I judge them on what and how they post and, ahem, discuss hockey here) |
|
|
|
Guest9692
( )
|
Posted - 07/28/2008 : 11:08:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
On a final note, I've never heard of someone being baptised in a swimming pool but I must say that the whole notion really turns it into a joke. It seems counterproductive, considering baptism is a sign that you care about religion enough to go out of your way, only to make a mockery out of it.
Of course ~90% of canadians don't have mommies and daddies that are rich enough to send their kid to a private school either. Guess in the sheltered life, you don't get to see much with a giant silver spoon blocking your view. |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 07/29/2008 : 14:56:57
|
July 29, 2008
‘Will things ever be the same again? It’s the final countdown’ –Europe
Don’t look now, but the Olympics are a little more than a week away. A lot of debate circulates the games. There are those trying to sabotage all the hard work and planning by turning it into a political hodgepodge. Advertisers are up in arms over which logo Yao Ming will sport on his sneakers. T.V. stations are tugging war over prime time slots. From the moment the flag-bearers take stage in the opening ceremonies until the final moments when the torch is passed to the London representative, everyone who’s anyone will have something to say about it. Is it not interesting that amidst this entire hubbub, the athletes themselves have seldom been heard?
A local publication that caught my eye recently as a bathroom reader asked the athletes what they thought. Interestingly, most of them seemed to think they were discussing a game of rock-paper-scissors. ‘Ah well, it all depends on the day. If I’m having a good day maybe I can win and if not then it’s O.K. I hope, but I know that I could easily be at the very front or the very back of about twenty contenders, so I don’t really stress over it.’
If I worked four years towards one goal, I’d be damn pissed if I didn’t achieve it. It’s the reason some Americans don’t feel comfortable evacuating the troops: you spend the time to do a job, do yourself a favour and get it right! So, how does this all relate to hockey? Well, many people debate the notion of NHLers playing in the games, and this ‘ready-FIRE-aim’ attitude portrayed by the many athletes in the publication sheds new light on the argument. After all, the biggest anti-NHLers argument is that they don’t care enough about it. Many point to the 2006 meltdown as a reference point.
I’d argue otherwise. Remember the 2002 Olympics? Or is that ancient history by now? Can you say the NHL-comprised team didn’t care? Can you say they weren’t passionate? No. No one said that then. Only when we lose do people complain. It follows the French axiom, ‘If you want to kill your dog, accuse him of having rabies.’ NHLers definitely do care about the Olympics, and don’t you ever forget it. The difference is it isn’t their entire lives. And percisely because it isn’t their entire lives, they can take it seriously without having a nervous breakdown Perdita Felicien-style. Athletes that only compete in the Olympics are scared to stress the magnitude of the event, because it can destroy them. NHLers aren’t scared to take the games seriously.
For an NHLer playing in the games, hockey is their life; the Olympics aren’t. Representing Canada is a dream, and they revere the opportunity, they don’t fear it. I’d rather send a half-inspired Jarome Iginla to represent my country than an off-the-charts Jason Krog. Look me in the eye and tell me you disagree.
Proudly Celebrating Over 50 Blogs and Counting |
Edited by - Alex on 07/30/2008 03:55:37 |
|
|
|
Guest9536
( )
|
Posted - 07/29/2008 : 16:09:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
.....Clearly, we see, skill is not the only deciding factor when searching for a captain. The ability to rally a group of individuals towards a common purpose is equally important (and in many cases more so).
To spot a perfect example of this, look no further than Jarome Iginla. Several years before the red tape was actually cut through and he was named captain in Calgary, it was clear (albeit unofficial) that he was running the show. He could do it all – score, hit, block shots, fight… This is the type of guy that would be a leader on any one of the twenty-nine other franchises in the NHL. This is the type of player that doesn’t need the letter on his sweater to affirm what he already knows. .....
Alex you're contradicting yourself. In a blog above you say that Sundin is bad leader and that his playing ability doesn't make him good leader, then you go on to say that Iginla is a great leader because of all the very same things that Sundin has. |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 07/29/2008 : 16:15:20
|
I would agree in the respect that the professionals,(Basketball, Hockey), who do get to go and compete at the Olympic level are indeed more accustomed to the stresses involved at that level of competition. And, as you mentioned, they don't worry as much about their performance, as it is business as usual, with the added adrenaline rush, and patriotic pride, of playing for your country.
That being said, I'm still undecided as to whether or not sending these professional athletes into the Olympics is still the right call, falling in with what, in my opinion, is the essence of the Olympics themselves, the best of the best amateur atheletes in the world competing. Of course, I am not sure if there is such a thing as a truly amateur athlete involved in the games anymore with sponsorships, world championships, nationals, regionals etc., as I'm sure the only true amateurs are those that don't compete under the banners of said coroporate sponsorships.
In particular the Winter Olympics, as the athletes seem to all be competing between Olympic years, in various, what seem to me anyways, professional environments and competitions. Curlers have their huge briers, skiers have their various world circuits for points and championships with corporate sponsors, hockey players have the NHL and the various Elite professional leaugues, and so on..
A part of me enjoys watching the world's best hockey players play in a tournament pitting country against country, I thought the Canada Cup was the perfect setting for this sort of All-star fest.
All the professionals just kinda make me sometimes wonder when the Olympics became the same All-star games.
Personally, I don't think there would be anything wrong with each country having an Olympic program, forcing players to commit to said program for the max 4 years, and then see how the games unfold, that would be pride in playing for your country, giving up the immediate gratification of the big money, for the ability to say they truly played for pride. If a young hockey player could do that, they could still be in the NHL, with all that experience, at 23,24.
Just imagine a team going into the Olympics having a couple years to develop together, rather than 2 weeks.
Just my thoughts... |
|
|
|
BradTheBadDad
Top Prospect
73 Posts |
Posted - 07/29/2008 : 19:02:02
|
The way I see it, the Olympics are clearly and openly no longer about amateur athletes and therefore the NHL shouldn't try to start any new trends at the expense of team Canada.
As for Gary Betman, if he thinks he will lose more popularity by icing a mediocre product for a couple weeks while the athletes represent their country than by not sending them he could use a lesson in PR. If Canada loses because of it (I have a hunch other countries have stronger players non-NHL based, especially the Europeans) no one would tolerate it.
''Eat. Sleep. Hockey'' |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 07/30/2008 : 15:01:06
|
July 30, 2008
Torontonians seem to bitch a hell of a lot about the lousy teams in our city, but it’s still fun to experience it firsthand. Hockey’s gone fishing, so what better way to kill a rainy Wednesday than by taking in a Jays game? Think again. Today happened to be Camp Day at the Rogers Centre, a gimmick that makes the Leafs’ free pre-season game look like a Rembrandt beside an X-Men comic. Imagine the entire nosebleeds section filled with cranky kids throwing things at each other, having the rules explained to them by their counselors, and inching their way through the aisle every five minutes to respond to nature’s call. I did take a few things away from the game though, all of which apply to hockey.
1. Bullpens.
Call it zany, call it wacky, call the Children’s Aid Society, but this is an idea that makes perfect sense in theory. Why did the Calgary Flames lose game seven this year? Goaltending. Imagine if off to the sides of every arena goalies could warm-up before the coach yanked his starter. It would make a world of difference. I would venture to say the number one reason goalies don’t get pulled in games where they should is because you can’t throw your backup from the pool into the hot-tub in one shot. If somehow goalies had a way to face a couple of shots, maybe from an automated machine or something, before going into the game it would mean less ‘freebie’ goals. It wouldn’t have given San Jose the chance to kick Calgary when they were down. The game would have been much closer, like it should have. Clearly it’s a work-in-progress, but other than impracticality you can’t say there’s anything inherently wrong in the line of thinking here.
2. Mini-series.
The baseball schedule is known for two things. 1) It’s damn long! 2) The mini-series. Now I wouldn’t touch the 162 game format with a ten foot pole, but the second idea has its perks. After all, a lot of people are ticked that they have to watch their team play the Predators, but if it was back-to-back that’s a different story. At least that way you let the teams build up some rivalry. Using my team as an example, I’d rather see a double header between the Hurricanes and Canadiens than have the NHL jam in the Coyotes, Panthers, Ducks, Canes, Isles and Jackets to kick off the season. Instead of trying to get rid of the ‘bad games’ early on, why not save face by making them ‘good games.’ A double-header is the perfect way. As for those teams like the Sharks that you only face once a year, at least make the next game against the Ducks and the next against the Coyotes. That way you get your ‘Pacific High’ all in one dose. Kapish?
Let me know your thoughts on my baseball-style-hockey.
Proudly Celebrating Over 50 Blogs and Counting |
Edited by - Alex on 07/31/2008 15:21:44 |
|
|
|
BradTheBadDad
Top Prospect
73 Posts |
Posted - 07/30/2008 : 17:33:27
|
This is such a blatant atempt to Americanize the game that it's funny. I literally had Dr. Pepper coming out my nose when I read the bullpen idea - comedy gold! You are right that it would help teams, but geez louise, ''impractical'' is the understatement of the year! Oh and it would look ridiculous. But I will give you points for being the innovator of a theoretically brilliant albeit practically stupid idea.
As for the second idea, I don't see why any traditional hockey fans would mind it. It's ''Americanizing'' but, as you said, for the purpose of renewing rivalry. The way I see it, it's a damage control method for placing teams like the Hurricanes and Coyotes in the NHL to begin with, and it would work. After all, it's a fair compromise. Players get to enjoy the cities they visit (because half the trip isn't wasted on flying or unpacking if you're spending more time in the city.) Fans still get to see a bit of every team. It renews rivalries, without resorting to the 8 game inter divisional schedule which got boring for a lot of people after awhile, and a tad unfair.
A lot of baloney is thrown around, but the NHL should actually consider the mini series idea.
''Eat. Sleep. Hockey'' |
|
|
|
Guest9870
( )
|
Posted - 07/30/2008 : 19:06:16
|
| That bullpen idea would be crazy! I've got to say though, baseball games are all about the ''atmosphere'' i.e. the giveaways, jumbotron, cheering... not so much about the game. I would say the NHL is one of the best at making the game the main event. Wouldn't want to change that by taking any unneccesary risks. So while the theoretical upside is lucrative, the theoretical downside isn't worth it. |
|
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 07/30/2008 : 19:49:06
|
In a paper I wrote years ago I had both these suggestions, among others, listed.
It makes complete sense to have a bullpen for goalies. My theory suggested that it wouldn't be in view of the fans though. It wasn't an entertainment innovation - it was a competition innovation. My proposed location was out of the way in the bowels of the arena - just like the indoor cages in most ballparks ...usually situated between dressing rooms for example.
The 'series' I believe to also be a good idea. Less travel and travel cost, definite increase in rivalries. We have now seen this implemented in minor pro hockey due to the costs of travel coupled with the distance to competition (Alaska is a prime example of league isolation). A second positive repercussion is the decrease of injuries. Why? Less travel means less fatigue, less jet lag, less squeezing in of games into a smaller number of days, more off-days for rest, etc etc...
The NHL has always been making ongoing changes to everything from the rulebook to the on-ice markings and everything in between. To make adjustments such as these alters nothing about the way the game is played. They will, however, result in a better performance by the athletes and a better season for the fan.
These are two changes I would not be afraid of at all. These are two changes I would embrace. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Canada - Russia rap 
