Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
On 8/12/2023 at 12:18 AM, nfreeman said:

Yikes:

 

Post on Twitter was from last offseason.

I do have good faith in sources that have said Wheeler was a problem in WPG. 
 

Mark Schiefle has also been pointed to as an issue multiple times over the years. Best example might be his hit on Evans in the weird COViD season playoffs. A leader or face of the team type player doesn’t do that type of thing. The perfect example is how Steve Ott changed his persona on the ice somewhat when in a leadership role here. Playing dumb isn’t on a leader’s job list. 
Evander Kane obviously butted heads with leadership in WPG as well in a much more demonstrative fashion than he did anywhere else. If I had to guess, Andrew Ladd kept a lid on some of the more negative practices. Byufliegn wasn’t a classical leader but still had clout while being more lax as a leader. His retirement seemed to of set WPG down an ugly path culturally to the point their coach resigned and culture woes became somewhat commonplace in relation to WPG

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
4 hours ago, nfreeman said:

We're kinda counting angels on the head of a pin here, but since there isn't much else to discuss, I'd respond by saying that although you're right that this doesn't give us the deets we needs to evaluate anyone, it's still meaningful that an experienced journalist has stated publicly that there are some really bad people on the Jets' roster.

I'll refer to your pre-KA-rebuild take on the Sabres -- which I think was correct -- that the team's culture was fatally flawed and a total cleanout was needed.  That situation was a bit different, as you had identified Eichel, Reino and Risto as guys who needed to go, and on the Jets we don't know who the problem children are.  Still, though, I think this similarly is an indicator in favor of a significant rebuild.

I'd like more info, but I still think this was noteworthy.  Certainly if, say, John Vogl had tweeted this about the Sabres, we'd be deep into the weeds on this board about it.

I'd agree with that. It was a long time ago, but with Bogo and Kane coming out of a Winnipeg culture, and both having issues they brought here, makes me wonder how long their internal problems have been going on for? Might be a long standing problem(s).

So I guess GMs talking to Winnipeg are left with that problem. Is that guy (insert trade possible name) part of the problem or can you get him away from the problem. Safest course is to avoid the whole thing and everybody in it. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
On 8/12/2023 at 4:23 PM, PerreaultForever said:

This is the kind of internet comment that needs detailed elaboration though. What does "worst" mean? Worst off the ice? Worst on the ice ? Worst to journalists? Worst is a really broad and open ended term that can mean a lot of things. The "covering crime" part makes this seem a little attention grabbing and probably a little full of bs too. What exactly is the implication?

I’d guess he means that the locker room was filled with a bunch of ass hats.

Posted
44 minutes ago, Flashsabre said:

Boston will be an interesting team this year. They have lost a lot.

But but they like have that tough guy Lucic so they should be hunky dory 😎

Posted
On 8/12/2023 at 12:18 AM, nfreeman said:

Yikes:

 

All other discussion aside, for having 30 years in journalism, you would think his grammar would be better.

7 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

 

I really hope all that Bruins "downfall" talk comes true.

Posted
45 minutes ago, SwampD said:

All other discussion aside, for having 30 years in journalism, you would think his grammar would be better.

I really hope all that Bruins "downfall" talk comes true.

One would assume it has to based on how high they were last year. Even getting 100 points would be considered a major downfall

Posted
2 hours ago, SwampD said:

All other discussion aside, for having 30 years in journalism, you would think his grammar would be better.

Your beef?

Posted
13 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

Your beef?

12 hours ago, nfreeman said:

 Good question.  Seconded.

Shouldn’t it be “I have ever met,” or “I’ve ever met”?

What he wrote sounds wrong to me.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
7 hours ago, SwampD said:

Shouldn’t it be “I have ever met,” or “I’ve ever met”?

What he wrote sounds wrong to me.

I e'er h'met.

Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, SwampD said:

Is that drunken Scottsman?

Just screwing around, sorry.  But "I ever have met" would be the correct construction IMO.  Or "I have met, ever."

Edited by Eleven
Posted
1 minute ago, Eleven said:

Just screwing around, sorry.  But "I ever have met" would be the right construction IMO.

Not too sure about that.

Posted
On 7/8/2023 at 12:02 AM, PerreaultForever said:

I hate the loser point too. Maybe it's just because I am old and grew up with that but I never had a problem with regular season ties. The idea was always if you could get a tie on the road it was a good night and not winning at home was going to cost you in the standings and so road teams tended to play for the tie and home teams tried harder to go for the win but a point was a point and we went on to the next game.  I never understood the problem. I mean in baseball teams split double headers all the time which is a win each but really no different than ties in terms of the standings. 

 

The problem was our culture change.  People complained about watching a sporting event with no winner.  NFL Football put in the dumbest OT rules ever just to get a winner.  

  • Agree 1
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...