WildCard Posted April 25, 2016 Report Posted April 25, 2016 No, it was tall. All I saw was average, but I know he wasn't short. It was a myth started by Britain as propaganda, and it's still working Other thing I heard was he lost Waterloo because he had hemorrhoids, and couldn't be close enough to the battle to relay commands Quote
JJFIVEOH Posted April 25, 2016 Report Posted April 25, 2016 Only on SS can the entire point be completely ignored while making an issue about a reference. If Napoleon wasn't short, how come they use his name when referring to a 'Napoleon Complex'? Quote
WildCard Posted April 25, 2016 Report Posted April 25, 2016 Only on SS can the entire point be completely ignored while making an issue about a reference. If Napoleon wasn't short, how come they use his name when referring to a 'Napoleon Complex'? See above. Wouldn't be the first time we've kept using a title unintentionally ironically Quote
JJFIVEOH Posted April 25, 2016 Report Posted April 25, 2016 I give up....................................... You guys really should brush up on your history. See above. Wouldn't be the first time we've kept using a title unintentionally ironically Did you get the reference? Quote
JJFIVEOH Posted April 25, 2016 Report Posted April 25, 2016 Yes, that's it. Did you get the reference? Quote
WildCard Posted April 25, 2016 Report Posted April 25, 2016 Did you get the reference? Something being driven home culturally doesn't make it correct. Weather I understand the reference or not. Vikings didn't wear horns on their helmets either, doesn't mean I don't know what someone means by a 'Viking helmet' however Quote
Eleven Posted April 25, 2016 Author Report Posted April 25, 2016 Only on SS can the entire point be completely ignored while making an issue about a reference. If Napoleon wasn't short, how come they use his name when referring to a 'Napoleon Complex'? Probably due to the British propaganda that WildCard mentioned. Similar to the Marco Rubio "Trump has small hands" propaganda. Quote
JJFIVEOH Posted April 25, 2016 Report Posted April 25, 2016 So basically you're just being petty without even addressing my point. Jesus Christ...... and I'm the one that likes to argue? I make a point about rivalries and here comes the gang to cry about the correct usage of a Napoleon Complex reference. Carry on. If y'all are going to be this argumentative this far into the offseason I sure as hell don't want to be around come August. Quote
Eleven Posted April 25, 2016 Author Report Posted April 25, 2016 So basically you're just being petty without even addressing my point. Jesus Christ...... and I'm the one that likes to argue? I make a point about rivalries and here comes the gang to cry about the correct usage of a Napoleon Complex reference. Carry on. If y'all are going to be this argumentative this far into the offseason I sure as hell don't want to be around come August. No one's arguing...just having a polite conversation about trivia here. We all know what a Napoleon complex is. Quote
JJFIVEOH Posted April 25, 2016 Report Posted April 25, 2016 Would you rather I said 'nitpicking'? Quote
Trettioåtta Posted April 25, 2016 Report Posted April 25, 2016 Napoleon is trying to force rivalries, that just doesn't happen. If he wants to create rivalries, go back to playing division teams 7-8 times a year and make it so there isn't 4 months off in between. Players create rivalries. With free agency running rampant, rivalries are short lived if they exist at all. Naploeon being a dwarf aside. When has free agency been rampant? Its been getting worse for years as key players are locked up. Can anyone name the team that lost their biggest 1 or 2 players to free agency in the last decade? I can name one. And it was a day I'll never forget. Quote
JJFIVEOH Posted April 25, 2016 Report Posted April 25, 2016 Naploeon being a dwarf aside. When has free agency been rampant? Its been getting worse for years as key players are locked up. Can anyone name the team that lost their biggest 1 or 2 players to free agency in the last decade? I can name one. And it was a day I'll never forget. In the last 10-15 years. Rivalries are nothing like they used to be no matter how much anybody tries to hype it. Quote
ubkev Posted April 25, 2016 Report Posted April 25, 2016 Allegedly, Napoleon had very tall (for the time) bodyguards, who always surrounded him. He was affectionately called "Le Petit Caporel" http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2010/03/napolean-bonaparte-having-been-short-is-a-myth/ Quote
Eleven Posted April 26, 2016 Author Report Posted April 26, 2016 Naploeon being a dwarf aside. When has free agency been rampant? Its been getting worse for years as key players are locked up. Can anyone name the team that lost their biggest 1 or 2 players to free agency in the last decade? I can name one. And it was a day I'll never forget. The really big ones always seem to go, Nash, Richards, etc. I expect the same from Stamkos. Quote
Randall Flagg Posted April 26, 2016 Report Posted April 26, 2016 Awesome first shift for the Blues. Keep it up this time. Quote
Wyldnwoody44 Posted April 26, 2016 Report Posted April 26, 2016 Elliott needs to stop that if the blues are going to win Quote
Thorner Posted April 26, 2016 Report Posted April 26, 2016 Elliott needs to stop that if the blues are going to win Well, they aren't going to win, so I guess that's why he didn't stop it. Hawks need a goal? Well, Schwartz will randomly blow a tire and fall on his ass once entering the zone, creating the chance. Quote
Wyldnwoody44 Posted April 26, 2016 Report Posted April 26, 2016 Well, they aren't going to win, so I guess that's why he didn't stop it. Hawks need a goal? Well, Schwartz will randomly blow a tire and fall on his ass once entering the zone, creating the chance. I think he fell because of a terrible pass across, either way it sucked, Chicago isn't going to go away, the refs had no bearing on *that* period. Elliott looks awfully shaky tonight tho Quote
Thorner Posted April 26, 2016 Report Posted April 26, 2016 I think he fell because of a terrible pass across, either way it sucked, Chicago isn't going to go away, the refs had no bearing on *that* period. Elliott looks awfully shaky tonight tho I was secretely hoping the Blackhawks would score first, and hold on to the lead for a bit. Just the feeling that if Blues got an early lead again, they were gonna blow it. Once the momentum shifts, if it hasn't already, there will be no stopping Chicago. Hawks are 18-0 in playoff games where Hossa scores. There it is. There was never a chance St.Louis would win this series. Inevitability. Quote
WildCard Posted April 26, 2016 Report Posted April 26, 2016 (edited) Playoff officiating is such a joke. You will never ind a more blatant trip than that one on Shaw. Hell, the entire stadium groaned This series is so good. I wish this could go 15 games. That series and save by Crawford was just amazing Chicago is just incredibly inventive and dynamic. So much fun to watch Elliot with the leg save! If you're not watching this game, you're missing the SCF Edited April 26, 2016 by WildCard Quote
SwampD Posted April 26, 2016 Report Posted April 26, 2016 Playoff officiating is such a joke. You will never ind a more blatant trip than that one on Shaw. Hell, the entire stadium groaned This series is so good. I wish this could go 15 games. That series and save by Crawford was just amazing Chicago is just incredibly inventive and dynamic. So much fun to watch Elliot with the leg save! If you're not watching this game, you're missing the SCF I kinda can't believe the hockey I'm watching. This game is somethin' else. Quote
Thorner Posted April 26, 2016 Report Posted April 26, 2016 (edited) I love how Keith is allowed to hook Fabbri when he's basically in alone Edited April 26, 2016 by Thorny Quote
WildCard Posted April 26, 2016 Report Posted April 26, 2016 I kinda can't believe the hockey I'm watching. This game is somethin' else.Can you imagine if every team played this well? If hockey was this entertaining on a consistent basis, even in the playoffs, it's popularity would boomI love how Keith is allowed to hook Fabbri when he's basically in aloneWas it a hook? I didn't think so, but I could be wrong. It is very clear though that the refs aren't going to be calling anything tonight You're nuts if you don't wanna see a Stars-Hawks series Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.