Eleven Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 Wow Who's next? Well, we knew Kulikov was nursing something, right? Quote
Derrico Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 I must have missed the memo that this is the 2006 Conference Finals Quote
Hoss Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 O'Reilly in but he'll have reins on him, per DDB. Ryan O'Reins Quote
That Aud Smell Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 Anyone who reads Bill Simmons is already familiar with the Ewing theory, but for those who aren't: it's when a team loses its star player and inexplicably pulls together and is better without him. Let's do it. No, sir. No. The Ewing Theory implicitly places a stank on the departed or missing star. The theory was based on the idea that the star receives too much attention from the media and fans, and that the team doesn't (can't) win anything with the star being featured. Also, Simmons jumped the shark and was then eaten by the shark. A decade ago or so. Kulikov out tonight, Casey Nelson in :huh: Quote
LGR4GM Posted October 13, 2016 Author Report Posted October 13, 2016 Well, we knew Kulikov was nursing something, right?Bruised tailbone Quote
LTS Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 Look.. here's what I know. My Sabres sweater will be on. My sound system will be blasting. This is the opening of the Sabres season. This is what I wait for every year regardless of what every paid and unpaid analyst has said about this team. This is what I need to get through the long months of winter. Despite any injury, any prognostication of success, this is Buffalo Sabres hockey. I love hockey and no gods are going to take that away from me. I cannot wait until tonight. Oh, and as for hockey gods. As I see it, there is nothing crueler than having your franchise savior score 4 goals and still coming up with a loss. All the credit in the world to Matthews for a great game, but the rest of the Leafs couldn't stop the Senators. Quote
LGR4GM Posted October 13, 2016 Author Report Posted October 13, 2016 Sounds like Reinhart will be taking face offs for his line Quote
Hoss Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 Sabres first line is Kane - O'Reilly - Reinhart with Reinhart taking face offs as Liger said Quote
darksabre Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 I must have missed the memo that this is the 2006 Conference Finals :lol: :( Quote
nfreeman Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 No, sir. No. The Ewing Theory implicitly places a stank on the departed or missing star. The theory was based on the idea that the star receives too much attention from the media and fans, and that the team doesn't (can't) win anything with the star being featured. Also, Simmons jumped the shark and was then eaten by the shark. A decade ago or so. :huh: I wouldn't go that far, but IMHO The Ringer isn't nearly as good as Grantland was (admittedly a very high standard). Sabres first line is Kane - O'Reilly - Reinhart with Reinhart taking face offs as Liger said Eeeeeeeeesssshhh. That means ROR's back is still pretty problematic. Quote
MattPie Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 Did he really hit on a Beaut?? I thought it was a Beaut's fiance. Quote
beerme1 Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 Time to do this in honor of last season. Matty Mo 2 G 1A Quote
WildCard Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 I thought it was a Beaut's fiance.I believe Reinhart is heterosexual Quote
Eleven Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 I believe Reinhart is heterosexual Even if he is, the Beaut might not be. Quote
TrueBlueGED Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 No, sir. No. The Ewing Theory implicitly places a stank on the departed or missing star. The theory was based on the idea that the star receives too much attention from the media and fans, and that the team doesn't (can't) win anything with the star being featured. Also, Simmons jumped the shark and was then eaten by the shark. A decade ago or so. :huh: Looking at reaction yesterday, is it really a stretch to suggest Eichel is getting more focus than he should? But yea, Simmons is a shell of his former self. Quote
darksabre Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 I believe Reinhart is heterosexual Right. The fiance is a woman. Quote
WildCard Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 Even if he is, the Beaut might not be.That was my other thought Right. The fiance is a woman.Samson tried to hit on an engaged lesbian? Tough break kid :lol: Quote
TrueBlueGED Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 I wouldn't go that far, but IMHO The Ringer isn't nearly as good as Grantland was (admittedly a very high standard). The drop in quality from Grantland to the Ringer is stunning and sad. I barely ever visit the Ringer. As to O'Reilly...I think I'd rather give him this game and the next two days off to rest up for Sunday than let him play tonight while hobbled. Quote
darksabre Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 That was my other thought Samson tried to hit on an engaged lesbian? Tough break kid :lol: I feel his pain. I never had very good gaydar. :lol: Quote
That Aud Smell Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 Ennis - Larsson - Foligno I want (need) to be pleasantly surprised by that second line. Looking at reaction yesterday, is it really a stretch to suggest Eichel is getting more focus than he should? But yea, Simmons is a shell of his former self. But, sir. The Ewing Theory also implies that there is a certain fatal (if difficult to identify) flaw, a net-team-negative associated with the missing star. I'm going to ask you to make a burnt sacrifice of some sort in order to expiate the sin of having invoked The Ewing Theory relative to the upcoming absence of one John Robert Eichel. Quote
TrueBlueGED Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 I want (need) to be pleasantly surprised by that second line. But, sir. The Ewing Theory also implies that there is a certain fatal (if difficult to identify) flaw, a net-team-negative associated with the missing star. I'm going to ask you to make a burnt sacrifice of some sort in order to expiate the sin of having invoked The Ewing Theory relative to the upcoming absence of one John Robert Eichel. His middle name is Robert? Can we just call him the Chief Justice? Quote
Claude Balls Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 Anyone who reads Bill Simmons is already familiar with the Ewing theory, but for those who aren't: it's when a team loses its star player and inexplicably pulls together and is better without him. Let's do it. Bills 3-0 without Sammy. Quote
darksabre Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 Bills 3-0 without Sammy. The narrative lives! Quote
That Aud Smell Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 Bills 3-0 without Sammy. I could sooner see Sammy being a Ewing Theory candidate than Eichel. Although I don't think the shoe fits for either of them. Quote
Claude Balls Posted October 13, 2016 Report Posted October 13, 2016 The sun rises whether the clouds are there or not, silly. Hmm, kinda like the saying - If a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to hear it, does it make a noise? If the sun rises and you can't see it, is it really there?? 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.