Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

It would not surprise me if that was there goal. But from a long term prespective it makes little sense. Having the next superstar in Carolina would result in an increase in attendance and fan interest, but would not have the same effect as if LeBron James decided to sign with Charlotte Bobcats in terms of sponsorship revenue. If McDavid is in a Canadian Market or playing for a team close to Canada, the values of those sponsorship deals increase immensely in terms of overall dollars to the NHL.

 

Fair deuce. Hopefully McDavid (and Eichel!) end up exactly where they belong.

Posted

 

 

If we finish 1st and them 2nd,I'd almost rather have some other team win the lottery just so neither of them go to Carolina.

 

Agree 100%. Take Eichel...let McDavid go to Winnipeg or Arizona. No McEichel in Carolina. No. No. No!!!

Posted

 

 

Agree 100%. Take Eichel...let McDavid go to Winnipeg or Arizona. No McEichel in Carolina. No. No. No!!!

 

You're not serious, right? Who gives a flying ###### where Eichel goes if we get McDavid.

Posted

Mixed results in the CHL last night. Florida wins in OT, and the Flames win in regulation. Blues and NYI with losses. Tuesday's Game against the Leafs should be interesting as Toronto looks like they are ready to implode and go on a serious CHL Winning Streak.

Posted

Current standings through games played 10/25.

 

Team ----- GP - L - W - OT - PTS

Buffalo 9 7 2 0 14

Carolina 7 5 0 2 12

Winnipeg 7 5 2 0 10

Edmonton 8 4 3 1 9

Calgary 10 4 5 1 9

Arizona 7 3 3 1 7

Florida 7 2 2 3 7

NY I 8 2 6 0 4

 

Losipeg only team in action today. Once everybody's played 10 we'll figure out relegation.

Posted

Losipeg

 

Have you ever created a glossary of the nicknames you've created for NHL clubs? Phlyers, Loafs, Eulers, and such. An accompanying explanation of how the name was derived would be welcome as well.

Posted

 

 

You're not serious, right? Who gives a flying ###### where Eichel goes if we get McDavid.

 

Serious as a heart attack. I want no part of either generational talent here and having all the "fans" re-emerge from the woodwork. It would be unbearable.

Posted

 

 

Have you ever created a glossary of the nicknames you've created for NHL clubs? Phlyers, Loafs, Eulers, and such. An accompanying explanation of how the name was derived would be welcome as well.

Never have before but have a few minutes, so here you go:

 

From the Snorris division days - all 6 were horrible and the nicknames could readily be altered to reflect that fact:

 

Losipeg Jest

Dallas (Minnesota) No Stars

Chicago Black Holes

St Louis Lose

Detroit Dead Things

Toronto Make Us Laughs which when respecting the Leafs spelling should properly be spelled Laffs; someone here referred to them as Loafs and I'll usually run w/ that.

 

Obviously, it's been a long while since Black Holes has been appropriate and Detroit hasn't been the Dead Things in ages.

 

Ottawa Otters - obviously alliterative.

Carolina Candy Canes - ditto.

 

Edmonton Eulers - combo alliterative and tribute to the mathematician Euler.

 

Filadelphia Phlyers - why not?

SJ Snarks - ditto.

 

Florida Swamp Cats & Arizona Desert Dogs - seem obvious.

 

Calgary Lames - they typically are.

 

NY Rags - someone else here was running w/ that one and it's quicker than typing out Strangers.

 

Moe-ray-all Hab(itant)s - (roughly) phonetic spelling.

Baaaa-stan - ditto.

 

Pittsburgh Pigeons - alliterative and more apt. Outside of a zoo or the replacement for the Igloo, where the heck are you gonna find a penguin in Pittsburgh?

 

Missing some of the more commonly used ones (Isles, Avs, Bolts) and probably also a couple of crass ones. ;)

Posted

Have you ever created a glossary of the nicknames you've created for NHL clubs? Phlyers, Loafs, Eulers, and such. An accompanying explanation of how the name was derived would be welcome as well.

 

Never have before but have a few minutes, so here you go:

 

From the Snorris division days - all 6 were horrible and the nicknames could readily be altered to reflect that fact:

 

Losipeg Jest

Dallas (Minnesota) No Stars

Chicago Black Holes

St Louis Lose

Detroit Dead Things

Toronto Make Us Laughs which when respecting the Leafs spelling should properly be spelled Laffs; someone here referred to them as Loafs and I'll usually run w/ that.

 

Obviously, it's been a long while since Black Holes has been appropriate and Detroit hasn't been the Dead Things in ages.

 

Ottawa Otters - obviously alliterative.

Carolina Candy Canes - ditto.

 

Edmonton Eulers - combo alliterative and tribute to the mathematician Euler.

 

Filadelphia Phlyers - why not?

SJ Snarks - ditto.

 

Florida Swamp Cats & Arizona Desert Dogs - seem obvious.

 

Calgary Lames - they typically are.

 

NY Rags - someone else here was running w/ that one and it's quicker than typing out Strangers.

 

Moe-ray-all Hab(itant)s - (roughly) phonetic spelling.

Baaaa-stan - ditto.

 

Pittsburgh Pigeons - alliterative and more apt. Outside of a zoo or the replacement for the Igloo, where the heck are you gonna find a penguin in Pittsburgh?

 

Missing some of the more commonly used ones (Isles, Avs, Bolts) and probably also a couple of crass ones. ;)

 

Awesome. Reminds me of Tuesday Morning Quarterback (aka TMQ, formerly with NFL.com and now writes for ESPN.com) and his hilarious team nicknames.

Posted (edited)

Awesome. Reminds me of Tuesday Morning Quarterback (aka TMQ, formerly with NFL.com and now writes for ESPN.com) and his hilarious team nicknames.

 

Buffalo Born Gregg Easterbrook

Edited by BRAWNDO
Posted

NY Rags - someone else here was running w/ that one and it's quicker than typing out Strangers.

 

I thought Rags was a pretty common name for them. I know I've used it for years.

Posted

Current standings through games played 10/26.

 

Team ----- GP - L - W - OT - PTS

Buffalo 9 7 2 0 14

Carolina 7 5 0 2 12

Winnipeg 8 5 3 0 10

Edmonton 8 4 3 1 9

Calgary 10 4 5 1 9

Arizona 7 3 3 1 7

Florida 7 2 2 3 7

NY I 8 2 6 0 4

 

Quiet evening in the CHL. Only the Eulers are (relatively) active.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...