Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Called it last summer, Bowman is not a good GM. There was a great article on it too

 

BTW, Ken Holland? Also, not a great GM

3 Chicago cups say your wrong.
Posted

The bottom quote in your signature reads like the speaker learned to communicate solely based on the dialogue in pokemon game boy games

You are missing all sorts of context on that one.

 

Anyway, not bothering to watch the Sabres tonight upon my return home. Sad to say. Instead, watching St. Louis - Colorado. It’s like a game seven to get into the playoffs. Mind blown.

Posted

The bottom quote in your signature reads like the speaker learned to communicate solely based on the dialogue in pokemon game boy games

Seems about on par for the poster that wrote it

 

You are missing all sorts of context on that one.

 

Anyway, not bothering to watch the Sabres tonight upon my return home. Sad to say. Instead, watching St. Louis - Colorado. It’s like a game seven to get into the playoffs. Mind blown.

For everything about jeffismagic, at least he made the offseason bearable 

Posted

Barzal finished with 85 points. He tied Malkin in rookie scoring (albeit 1 year older) in a league that scores quite a bit less than that one.

This year was comparable to those old years now. It's been a great offensive year 

Posted

The NHL,just screwed St. Louis 1/3 as violently as they did theSabres in 1999. ###### this league.

The offside challenge? Was there an angle that showed it clearly over the line?

Posted

The offside challenge? Was there an angle that showed it clearly over the line?

The St. Louis feed had one. It was out. Seven minutes for the review and the league just shrugged.

 

I think the offside review is dumb. Much like the toe in the crease rule was dumb. But if you're going to have it...

Posted

The St. Louis feed had one. It was out. Seven minutes for the review and the league just shrugged.

 

I think the offside review is dumb. Much like the toe in the crease rule was dumb. But if you're going to have it...

The penalty for losing an offside challenge worked well in my opinion. It almost eliminated the close reviews like that one. I did see angle from the blue line camera. It's so close and it's probably over, but probably isn't the standard when the call on the ice was that the puck stayed in.

Posted

The penalty for losing an offside challenge worked well in my opinion. It almost eliminated the close reviews like that one. I did see angle from the blue line camera. It's so close and it's probably over, but probably isn't the standard when the call on the ice was that the puck stayed in.

The fact that we're even discussing this really grinds my gears. I don't disagree with your take in a sane reality, but that's not what we're dealing with. If we're going to have the stupid rule the stupid rule should applied accordingly. The ret-con here is a problem.

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...