Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
CaptainScotty

Possible Reason For Njdevils Blacklisting.....

Recommended Posts

Spoken like a true CASUAL FAN Derek.

People come up with conspiracy theories about why your team gets the lack of coverage it does. If the Devils were a more exciting hockey team, you'd see better coverage and more respect given to them.

I haven't mentioned one significant aspect to it either.

If you don't want to see it, fine.

But I am far from "a casual fan." I watch as many hockey games as I can. If it's dull, I turn it off. And tonight, I bet I wasn't the only fan who shut it off.

What's the point of watching the final period when you already have a good idea what the end result will be?

That's how automatic your team is with a lead.

This is how the game is played now by a majority of teams. It doesn't make the game entertaining when teams cut off 3/4 of the ice using the neutral zone.

This is how it will continue to be until they bring back the tag-up rule which allows fast skating teams to be aggressive and forecheck. Until they bring it back, teams will continue to clog up the neutral zone and sap the life out of an exciting sport.

You don't have to agree.

All-Star Games DM? Most people don't watch those games because they are pointless exhibitions with no worth. Besides, half the skilled stars who get elected come up with excuses to sit them out. More and more overpaid athletes only care about themselves and don't give a darn about the fans. If they cared, they wouldn't sit out and put on a good show instead.

As for Burns, he's doing what he has to do to succeed. If he had the kind of team that could open it up, I'm sure he'd tell them to do so. It's like Burns said a couple of times. He doesn't order his players not to score. The Devils just aren't that kind of team.

The 2001 team was the most exciting product they ever put out there. I enjoyed watching their games a lot more because there was always that scoring threat. You got to see a lot more end-to-end rushes and creativity. You can say they didn't win it all but that was their own fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And can you name any other team in the playoffs that is blowing out anyone? EVERY team is playing defensive hockey. The Ducks have won every game by ONE goal.

So if the Devs are boring so is ever other winning team in the league.

I have no desire to see high scoring games unless it is my Devs doing the scoring. So 5-0 would be fine, but I guess it would still be dull because the other team didn't score? The logic of this argument defies logic. A winning team is exciting to watch. The reason the Devs have a small fan base is because they were the new kids on the block in a saturated market. NJ has never had an identity. It has always been the state between Philly and NY. Jersey people are horrible flag waggers for their own state. They don't have the pride their neighbors have and I truly don't understand it. NJ is a beautiful, economically strong state with excellent health care and education. It is an extremely desireable place to live, hence the most densely populated. Millions of people know a good thing, just aren't used to having a team of their own. I think that will change with the next generation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One more thing, Minnesota's Wild led by the trapper himself Lemaire, have sold out every game all year. They are tied with the Devs for winning the most one goal games. They play the trap, they play defense first. But they have tons of fans. Why? They play in Minnesota, hockey state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is it really that hard to figure out?

It's not.  I shut this game off because it was so boring.  I don't enjoy watching teams play to hold on.  

The Devils will probably win the Cup and not many people will care.

I know what people will say.  "Derek, you'd gladly take more wins for your Rangers if they played better D and backchecked effectively."

I would be happier if they won more games but it wouldn't be that enjoyable to watch if their style was totally defensive.  It would still be dull hockey.  

I hope my team hires a tough coach who preaches attacking, aggressive hockey with hitting and solid D because that's the most exciting brand of hockey a team can play.  Play to win.

Why should ESPN be excited about a team that takes the fun out of the game???

Gee Derek I thought tight defensive games were a trademark of playoff hockey. I guess you loved the last game then 4-3 lots of goals scored.

I think this year whatever team wins the cup, not many people will care outside of that team's fans.

I actually enjoyed the fact that TB couldn't get past the Jersey blue line in the third. It sort of reminded me of '95 when we didn't keep track of the opponents shots on goal, but on the number of minutes between their shots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

derek, that's a nice essay you wrote. too bad i got bored in the middle of it and decided to skip it.

hey how about them rangers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question; why is it only in hockey that teams get grief for playing a defensive system? Great defenses are celebrated in football. The NBA is a star player driven league to be sure but defense is still respected and not treated with scorn (with the exception of Pat Riley's thuggery and Detroit's faceless team that can't win in the playoffs). Nobody ever accused the Yankees of being boring all these years in the playoffs when their games would be 6-7 inning affairs because their pitching (speficially the bullpen) was so good. Why is it only hockey?

And why are the Devils the only team in hockey that conistently gets ripped for their 'defensive system'? Why not Ottawa, Minnesota, Dallas, Detroit with their 'left wing lock', whomever? :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gee Derek I thought tight defensive games were a trademark of playoff hockey. I guess you loved the last game then 4-3 lots of goals scored.

There was an extreme difference in how that game was played and tonight's. One had more flow.

I actually enjoyed the fact that TB couldn't get past the Jersey blue line in the third. It sort of reminded me of '95 when we didn't keep track of the opponents shots on goal, but on the number of minutes between their shots.

You said this. However, here's what you said in a different post:

QUOTE (westcoastdevfan @ Apr 30 2003, 10:02 PM)

I had to peek. I'm glad our team won. Sounds like it will be a fun game to watch! Now onto the nightcap. GO DUCKS!

Actually at times it was tough to watch. But I did!

Nothing else needs to be said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. Line of the night goes to brylin.

I agree with Rock. When did defense become so abhorred?

A free-flowing playoff game wouldn't seem right. It's like eating just icing off the cake, it tastes good for about 30 seconds, then you get sick to your stomach. I like 2-1 games as long as there is passion, physical play, and skating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hasan:

"Why is it only hockey? And why are the Devils the only team in hockey that conistently gets ripped for their 'defensive system'? Why not Ottawa, Dallas, whomever?"

It doesn't matter which team it is. Don't be fooled by the crap you see dished out on ESPN. They are very biased and favor bigger market teams. Just look at how they openly root for the Flyers and Avs during the playoffs.

Are those teams really any different in style than the Devils? Nope. The 2001 series wasn't even that exciting yet it went a full seven games. I seem to recall the 2000 series being a lot more fun to watch. It involved Dallas and New Jersey.

It's not just the Devils Has. It's other teams as well.

That's one of the reasons I am rooting for Ottawa to win over the Flyers. Because if they do, they can make for the best match-up against New Jersey. They played some of the best games this season and I would expect the play to be similar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually at times it was tough to watch. But I did!

Nothing else needs to be said.

Rock saying he found the game tough to watch at times doesn't mean he couldn't have enjoyed the rest of it. You make it sound like a small low point in a game ruins the whole thing. It's silly to expect a game to stay at the same pace the whole way though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It doesn't matter which team it is. Don't be fooled by the crap you see dished out on ESPN. They are very biased and favor bigger market teams. Just look at how they openly root for the Flyers and Avs during the playoffs.

No sh!t Derek. That is something that has been complained about here and other places for YEARS. They dont seem to understand that the NHL is actually a 30 team league and not a 6 team league. To that degree its their own damn fault no one watches the games on Espn/Espn 2. No one wants to see the same 6 teams 25 times a year each.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of the 8 teams left, 4 (NJ, TB, MINN, ANA) are rarely shown on ESPN with Vancouver and Ottawa being shown a little more (Vancouver because of the 10/10:30 time slot and Ottawa because of their recent success) So ESPN is praying for a Dallas-Philly final so we can hear more of Clement and Morganti praising everything aobut the Flyers, even the way they drink from the water bottles. And we can see more of damn JR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No one wants to see the same 6 teams 25 times a year each.

unfortunately the number of people who want to watch those games is a lot greater than how many would want to watch a game like urmm atlanta @ NJ so of coarse espn are going to show them and they're hardly going to bash the top teams players in fear of angering a big majority of their viewers. I'm not saying it's right but you can't really blame them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
unfortunately the number of people who want to watch those games is a lot greater than how many would want to watch a game like urmm atlanta @ NJ so of coarse espn are going to show them and they're hardly going to bash the top teams players in fear of angering a big majority of their viewers. I'm not saying it's right but you can't really blame them.

However its not exactly like people keep watching those teams either. Rating shave gone down each year for a couple of years now, yet all espn does in response is start pulling games, not diversifying them. There are some damn good rivalries out there that the casual US fan would never hear about because espn will never show it. You wont see an Oilers Flames game, or even a Devils Rangers game for christs sake. But hell we get to see all 4 Wings/Avs games, and what 3 Flyers Rangers games? And how many Penguins game cause of the love affair with Mario? Its not right, and doesnt exactly attract the non hockey fans to watch games when you see the same matchups each week. Hell i think at some point this season the Sharks were on espn 3 times in a week, who were they playing... The Wings, Avs and Stars i think. Gee great to see 3 of those big 6 in there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ I actually enjoyed the fact that TB couldn't get past the Jersey blue line in the third. It sort of reminded me of '95 when we didn't keep track of the opponents shots on goal, but on the number of minutes between their shots.

You said this. However, here's what you said in a different post:

QUOTE (westcoastdevfan @ Apr 30 2003, 10:02 PM)

I had to peek. I'm glad our team won. Sounds like it will be a fun game to watch! Now onto the nightcap. GO DUCKS!

Actually at times it was tough to watch. But I did!

Nothing else needs to be said.

Oh yes it does Derek I was referring to the fact as the game went on they were playing flawless defense, yet were only up by a goal. I knew that one slip and that game would have been tied. The Devils had a problem early getting out of the zone. I would be yelling at the TV for them to get the puck out. THAT'S WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO AS HARD TO WATCH!

Sorry Derek, why is it that whenever the Devils have success in the playoffs playing defense, all the fans of other teams who have not had as much success in the playoffs, always seem to come here and complain about the artistry of the Devils win???????? :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why bother? He was obviously cranky and this kind of talk/type is intended to piss people off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
derek, that's a nice essay you wrote. too bad i got bored in the middle of it and decided to skip it.

hey how about them rangers?

That's about what I'd expect from you. Always having to change the topic and bring up my team. Wow. Thanks for pointing out the OBVIOUS brylin. It doesn't even bother me because I'm so used to it from fans like yourself. If that's what makes you and your cheering section happy, then I guess you have nothing worthwhile to bring to the table in this discussion.

Rock wanted to know how come fans take shots at his team when they have playoff success. In case you forgot, the "original topic" was a Conspiracy Theory for why your team isn't given as much coverage as the "select few" they handpick on ESPN.

Do you know how that sounds :rolleyes: ?

As I pointed out earlier, it's not some dumb conspiracy against your team. Your team isn't the most entertaining to watch. Its organization is also very close-minded in how they operate. Everyone always asks why aren't there more features on Devil players?

The #1 answer is your general manager. The one who never wants any of his players to get a "Big Head."

His theory is that it must be TEAM oriented without any superstars except Brodeur. That's how the Devils are looked at. They hardly market themselves and hardly play a style that people are going to kiss their asses every two seconds.

Are they successful? Absolutely. It doesn't mean the general public is going to love how they play. They might respect them but it doesn't mean they have to like it.

So, why is a national broadcast that's biased in who they select for their games going to show off a team that doesn't want 19 of their 20 players promoted?

The two years they were exciting, you got a little more exposure (A Line, Gomez and Mogilny). The A Line was very popular. Unfortunately, they didn't last because one of them stopped playing to their capabilities.

Rock, I forgot to mention that Game Two was also pretty good. Two of the four games played in this series were fun to follow.

It's not just your team either. Dallas milked the clock against Anaheim the other night just to squeeze out a 2-1 win to get back in their series.

Not all lowscoring games are boring. The Dallas-New Jersey Game Five was one of the best OT games ever played. It was because the goalies had to be spectacular in it and there were plenty of glorious scoring chances.

If you have two teams going for it, it usually makes for a better game. That's the point.

Finally, why does it bother fans so much if their team isn't given as much respect as it deserves? Big deal if they aren't shown 15-20 times during the season. Your team is still having plenty of success. I would think if they win the Cup again, it would make it that much sweeter for fans here because of how little coverage they get from ESPN. It's the Bottom Line that counts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the Devils started getting big heads is when they ran into trouble. Arnott and Sykora got ran out of town for that very reason.

The only way a team like the Devils is going to get mentioned with the Stars, Wings, and Avalanche as the greatest teams of the last 10 years is by the way they have done it: refusing to market their players, keeping to a team system, and letting Lou's tyranny reign. They don't have the cash of those other teams (and I'm still surprised they spend what they do, but a presumed 3rd round berth should make up for that).

I do believe brylin's point was to illustrate that the Devils' philosophy is consistently better than the Rangers, who had that wonderful piece on I forget what, perhaps MSG Sportsdesk, where Sandy McCarthy, Darius Kasparaitis, Mike Dunham, and someone else were doing a modeling shoot. I mean, honestly, who needs that sort of crap?

Personally, I hate promoting the player over the team, in every sport. I know it's going to happen to Jeremy Shockey, if it hasn't already. I know it sells jerseys, but whatever, it's not a way to win games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do believe brylin's point was to illustrate that the Devils' philosophy is consistently better than the Rangers, who had that wonderful piece on I forget what, perhaps MSG Sportsdesk, where Sandy McCarthy, Darius Kasparaitis, Mike Dunham, and someone else were doing a modeling shoot. I mean, honestly, who needs that sort of crap?

Actually I think Dano and Gomez, possibly Pando (forgetting someone, getting this wrong?) did some shoots for a men's magazine but I don't know which one. Think Dano has done it twice. Modeling I wouldn't call it! :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I think Rolston did one too, but was there a fluff piece on television about it, to promote the team?

The piece was aired in March, right when the Rangers were falling out of the playoffs too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tri:

"I do believe brylin's point was to illustrate that the Devils' philosophy is consistently better than the Rangers, who had that wonderful piece on I forget what, perhaps MSG Sportsdesk, where Sandy McCarthy, Darius Kasparaitis, Mike Dunham, and someone else were doing a modeling shoot. I mean, honestly, who needs that sort of crap?"

I agree that it is a waste of time. Especially when the team isn't winning. You have two very different cultures though. One is in the center of a huge market while the other is in the shadows. That other one won't get as much publicity. Maybe it's easier for them because they don't have to deal with the kind of media distractions that the other one does. In New York, it's a media circus.

But realistically speaking, if the organization wasn't so disorganized in its approach to winning, would these off-ice things be that much of a distraction? If you set rules and make team priority, there might be a difference in the end results. That hasn't happened since the Evil Empire took over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×