matter2003 Posted November 18, 2008 Report Posted November 18, 2008 Bruins are not a team that has enough talent to be leading the division...I am tired of seeing them game after game squeaking out wins...Hopefully the Sabres can bitchslap them Wednesday night and put them back in their place....
darksabre Posted November 18, 2008 Report Posted November 18, 2008 I have to respectfully disagree. The Bruins have been working the past few years to get to where they are now. Thomas is a good goalie and the B's are playing a good system. It's not like the Sabres don't deserve to be lower.
rickshaw Posted November 18, 2008 Report Posted November 18, 2008 The Bruins and their style of play, is a disgrace to the NHL. I hate watching teams like Boston, NJ, and the likes. It's gross. Totally gross.
R_Dudley Posted November 18, 2008 Report Posted November 18, 2008 Bruins are not a team that has enough talent to be leading the division...I am tired of seeing them game after game squeaking out wins...Hopefully the Sabres can bitchslap them Wednesday night and put them back in their place.... Sorry disagree , i watched the game between them and TO last night and I know it's cliche but offense wins games, defense wins championships and they are playing like a team... and scarier yet so is Toronto, they really are playing hard something our current Sabres could use a lesson in. I have to respectfully disagree. The Bruins have been working the past few years to get to where they are now. Thomas is a good goalie and the B's are playing a good system. It's not like the Sabres don't deserve to be lower. Truth be told as painful as it may be... The Bruins and their style of play, is a disgrace to the NHL. I hate watching teams like Boston, NJ, and the likes.It's gross. Totally gross. I dislike it as well however the new NHL is gone and the old NHL is back and either you adjust to it or you lose and I hate losing worse. Isn't that exactly the kind of game we played for 50 minutes against Pens other night? It's very unfortunate but the league has allowed the old style back. This season they did start calling allot more of the hooks but they are looking the other way at all the interference and picks going on away from the puck or even before players get to the puck.
Stoner Posted November 18, 2008 Report Posted November 18, 2008 Re: The Old NHL. Does the league itself allow the slip-back to occur, or is it the GMs and coaches trying to re-adjust? If it's the latter, why do the owners put up with it? Aren't they smart enough to know the New NHL appealed to more people? Is winning at any cost worth it? This issue has always confounded me.
shrader Posted November 18, 2008 Report Posted November 18, 2008 Re: The Old NHL. Does the league itself allow the slip-back to occur, or is it the GMs and coaches trying to re-adjust? If it's the latter, why do the owners put up with it? Aren't they smart enough to know the New NHL appealed to more people? Is winning at any cost worth it? This issue has always confounded me. Coaches react too quickly. It's a hell of a lot easier to come up with some defensive scheme than an offensive one.
carpandean Posted November 18, 2008 Report Posted November 18, 2008 Isn't that exactly the kind of game we played for 50 minutes against Pens other night? I'm torn on the style issue. Anyone remember when Larry was fighting for the New NHL with more goals scored and the guys from NJ said something along the lines of our system works well, we are winning and our fans enjoy that? During the first few games, I felt exactly that way. I would rather that the rules be designed for 7-5 games, but it's not and I'd rather win 2-1 than lose 5-2. We played a system that was far closer to NJ/Boston than we were last year and it worked; we won 2-0, 3-1, etc. Every time we've slipped back, we've lost 5-2. So, within the current rules, I have no problem with a team playing a defensive style if it means they win (though, a true trap is really boring.) At the same time, I hope that they do make some changes to bring scoring back up. I now believe that those changes will have to be rules that can't be "interpreted" by refs or actual physical changes such as smaller goalie equipment or bigger nets. As for Boston being "not that good", I don't buy that. There is enough parity in this league that even the worst team can beat the best on a given night. However, the Bruins are built well and will be near the top for most of the season. Do they have some weaknesses? Yes, but they also have a lot of very good parts that play well together. They have a good mix of player types, too.
Claude Balls Posted November 18, 2008 Report Posted November 18, 2008 Hopefully the Sabres can bitchslap them Wednesday night and put them back in their place.... I hope so as well, but I really don't see it happening. I think it will be the other way around. Buffalo sports are riding a pretty good 0-for right now.
nfreeman Posted November 18, 2008 Report Posted November 18, 2008 Bruins are not a team that has enough talent to be leading the division...I am tired of seeing them game after game squeaking out wins...Hopefully the Sabres can bitchslap them Wednesday night and put them back in their place.... Really? I'd rather have Chara and Lucic than any 2 of our skaters, and Chara, Lucic and Savard than any 3 of our skaters. And Tim Thomas is outplaying Miller (and every other goalie in the NHL) to this point in the season.
Knightrider Posted November 18, 2008 Report Posted November 18, 2008 Re: The Old NHL. Does the league itself allow the slip-back to occur, or is it the GMs and coaches trying to re-adjust? If it's the latter, why do the owners put up with it? Aren't they smart enough to know the New NHL appealed to more people? Is winning at any cost worth it? This issue has always confounded me. I think the problem was that the large markets were built for the Old (Philly, Boston, NJ and Toronto come to mind) so our rose colored perception of the New might not be the same as a Cryer fan.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.