109 replies to this topic

[iamtheprodigy]

In my first post on this thread, I believe I said something to the effect that most of the time, I agree with this. Discussion, debate, they are the lifeblood of any message board. The point that you're either still not understanding or choosing to ignore is that coming into a thread meant to prop up a player and spouting "no way bro, he sucks" is like farting in church or dropping a deuce in the pool. It's just bad etiquette, and you're going to get some dirty looks. And no, you didn't start it, but you defended the naysayers vehemently enough that you became the target.

And once again, you make a claim about something I supposedly said with no quote to back it up. I am done with having words put in my mouth so please just drop it.

Edited by iamtheprodigy, 09 February 2011 - 11:28 AM.

[DaneykoIsGod]

And once again, you make a claim about something I supposedly said with no quote to back it up. I am done with having words put in my mouth so please just drop it.

Your very first post in this thread:

You picked probably the least-liked Devils over the past two seasons to appreciate, what did you expect? Did you expect everyone to suddenly be in love with the guy after 10 decent games? You can't just forget about the 150+ mediocre-to-very poor games he played before that. Obviously everyone wants him to continue to be successful, but I'm not surprised that few people are ready to bow down to him after what a disappointment he's been during 95% of his games played here.

And that, my friend, is defending the naysayers, the thing Rowdy said you did and you claimed he put words in your mouth.


Rowdy's 100% right that an appreciation thread really isn't the appropriate place for naysaying. It's like giving a eulogy at a funeral saying that the departed was an @sshole. The speaker may be speaking the truth, but it still isn't the proper forum for such sentiments and the speaker will get grief for it. What you did is basically the equivalent of saying, "The speaker wasn't lying, this dead guy really was an @sshole!" And you're allowed to do that, but you should expect to catch the same grief as the person who gave the eulogy.

It's just etiquette. Almost every single other thread on this board has, at one point or another, devolved into Rolston-bashing at some point, and deservedly so. Is it too much to ask to keep that kind of negativity out of a thread intended to be positive? Hell, that's why I kept my distance from the Langenbrunner appreciation thread. If you don't have anything nice to say ...


Are we ready for that group hug yet?

[iamtheprodigy]

And that, my friend, is defending the naysayers, the thing Rowdy said you did and you claimed he put words in your mouth.

Notice how I bolded part of his post. That's the part I was replying to. Sorry if you can't follow that. I never denied defending the "naysayers" (in other words, the people looking to have a discussion about Rolston in a thread about Rolston). What I denied was saying anything remotely close to "no way bro, he sucks." He also claimed earlier that I said something similar to "rolston is the worst player ever, TC is a moron." I have not said anything like this. I've also never suggested that people "weren't allowed" to appreciate Rolston, or that they were wrong for appreciating him, another claim they made against me.

My stance is simply that discussing a player in a thread devoted to them is fine. I do not agree that any of the posts in this thread were excessively negative, designed simply to "piss" on the thread or troll or whatever you want to call it. People were discussing Rolston in a pretty reasonable manner, I think. I don't see the problem with that no matter what the thread is titled. There are no special rules for appreciation threads. If you have it in the back of your head that there is some kind of moral code about it, then you'll just have to put up with it, unless it's turned into an official rule that only positive posts can be made in an appreciation thread.

Are we ready for that group hug yet?

It's cool how you pile on with everybody else against me and then make yourself out to be a "peacemaker". I've been trying to stop this for a while now and yet you guys insist on continuing the debate with bogus claims about things I've supposedly said.

[DaneykoIsGod]

Notice how I bolded part of his post. That's the part I was replying to. Sorry if you can't follow that. I never denied defending the "naysayers" (in other words, the people looking to have a discussion about Rolston in a thread about Rolston). What I denied was saying anything remotely close to "no way bro, he sucks." He also claimed earlier that I said something similar to "rolston is the worst player ever, TC is a moron." I have not said anything like this. I've also never suggested that people "weren't allowed" to appreciate Rolston, or that they were wrong for appreciating him, another claim they made against me.

Go back and re-read the part of Rowdy's post that you bolded.

In my first post on this thread, I believe I said something to the effect that most of the time, I agree with this. Discussion, debate, they are the lifeblood of any message board. The point that you're either still not understanding or choosing to ignore is that coming into a thread meant to prop up a player and spouting "no way bro, he sucks" is like farting in church or dropping a deuce in the pool. It's just bad etiquette, and you're going to get some dirty looks. And no, you didn't start it, but you defended the naysayers vehemently enough that you became the target.

He didn't say that you're the one saying "no way bro, he sucks". He's saying that you're missing the point that saying "no way bro, he sucks" in an appreciation thread is bad etiquette, akin to farting in church or pooping in the pool. There's a big difference. You keep asking him to prove you did something he never said you did.

Now read Rowdy's post again. This time, focus on the last sentence.

In my first post on this thread, I believe I said something to the effect that most of the time, I agree with this. Discussion, debate, they are the lifeblood of any message board. The point that you're either still not understanding or choosing to ignore is that coming into a thread meant to prop up a player and spouting "no way bro, he sucks" is like farting in church or dropping a deuce in the pool. It's just bad etiquette, and you're going to get some dirty looks. And no, you didn't start it, but you defended the naysayers vehemently enough that you became the target.

Again, he isn't saying you're the naysayer. He's saying you defended the naysayers, and did it so vehemently that you ended up becoming the target.

I'd like for this thread to die as much as you, but you keep accusing people of making "bogus claims" when such an accusation is a bogus claim in itself.



As for the real topic in hand, we all seem to agree that discussion on a forum like this is the goal. You don't need to keep bringing that up. Looks like we just have to agree to disagree on how much negativity belongs in a thread intended to be positive.

[iamtheprodigy]

Look I don't have time to go back and dig out the quotes from all the times that they claimed I said this or that (I've already wasted way too much time in this thread) but I shouldn't have to. You weren't even a part of this debate and everyone else has moved on (well, I haven't spoken with Rowdy but with everyone else it's over). I don't know what you're trying to prove by coming in here after it was basically over and saying "I'm the peacekeeper, let's all have a group hug! By the way, they're right and you're wrong and here's why..." It's really hypocritical of you.

This is my last post in this thread so go ahead and throw whatever you want into your next post. You can have the last word, I don't care.

Edited by iamtheprodigy, 09 February 2011 - 02:49 PM.

[DaneykoIsGod]

Oooooooooh, I get to have the last word! How about ....

BUMFUZZLE

[CarpathianForest]

Rowdy's 100% right that an appreciation thread really isn't the appropriate place for naysaying. It's like giving a eulogy at a funeral saying that the departed was an @sshole. The speaker may be speaking the truth, but it still isn't the proper forum for such sentiments and the speaker will get grief for it. What you did is basically the equivalent of saying, "The speaker wasn't lying, this dead guy really was an @sshole!" And you're allowed to do that, but you should expect to catch the same grief as the person who gave the eulogy.

Dude, I'd be stoked if someone called me an a$$hole in my funeral eulogy!

[RowdyFan42]

(well, I haven't spoken with Rowdy but with everyone else it's over)

As far as I'm concerned, it's over. As far as I can tell, you either don't get what I'm saying or don't care, and no amount of banging away on my part is going to change that. DIG broke down my posts even better than I probably could have, so if you're still unclear as to what I've been saying, I don't know what else I can do for you.

As for the real topic in hand, we all seem to agree that discussion on a forum like this is the goal. You don't need to keep bringing that up. Looks like we just have to agree to disagree on how much negativity belongs in a thread intended to be positive.

Sounds like a great place to end it.

Edited by RowdyFan42, 09 February 2011 - 03:40 PM.

[Dead]

Rolston seemed to have a good game lastnight, from what I watched.

[DaneykoIsGod]

Rolston seemed to have a good game lastnight, from what I watched.

I thought so too. He seemed less useless than usual along the boards, actually won a footrace or two and he came within inches of being the OT hero.

It's really amazing, the work Lemaire is doing. Let's count what he's done so far:
- Gotten the least confident team I've ever seen to believe in itself again.
- Gotten Ilya Kovalchuk to play responsible defensively.
- Squeezed blood from the useless stone that is Brian Rolston.
- Has fans of a team that was 27 points out of it a month ago talking about the playoffs.

If only one of these was accomplished, we fans would have been able to pull at least something positive from an otherwise dreadful season. But all four? That's flat out remarkable.

Seriously. Jacques for the Jack Adams. It's a small sample size, but the guy is working more miracles than Annie Sullivan.

Edit: Sorry to go all Jacques-happy in the Rolston thread, for some reason I thought I was reading the GDT.

Edited by DaneykoIsGod, 11 February 2011 - 08:56 AM.

[Pepperkorn]

I think it's appropriate!

Here is the thing -- The System as it stood had the entire team cowed. The term was over-used and not understood. Then when Lemaire came back --- the whole system thing again... he had no idea there was any disconnect so he was sort of destined to fail. He was SAYING there IS NO SYSTEM and no one listened -- just "yeah yeah-- suuuuure there's no system. and we dont trap.. and we get it... wink wink".

Well Lou SERIOUSLY blew it all out of the water so much so that Manta and many other old timers no longer felt confident in his vision. I just felt like it HAD to happen. The team did NOT understand accept or even REALIZE what it just didn't know. Maybe you all missed it in the lines and lines I write -- but I wrote that I saw no other alternative than to just shut her down - have the team drift rudderless to rule itself. I think maybe the team wanted Mac and I think Lou was fair in giving him the job. I think Mac was forewarned - and I think he honestly had the option to back out. I feel Lou probably said - If you think this team will listen to you you've got the job. I also think Lou knew what I knew.... the team was incapable of listening. Mac was destined to fail. But it had to be done. Lou gave him all the facts without saying what he knew in his heart to be true -- John, this organization needs you to take one for the team - the choice is yours. Lou chooses his words VERY carefully. The nanosecond he said If he WANTS IT... it struck me at the time and I still feel Lou knew this was going to all go down and saw no other alternative ... except the flipping PIPE DREAM these guys had that they knew hockey and could manage themselves MIGHT turn out to be true - Maybe Mac could turn it around -- but come on, most of us knew he couldn't.

Maybe none of it was on purpose on Lou's part -- but the bright side was I called this a plan from the start. Said it had to be done -- Lou did it -- and now we can honestly get some focus going. I did NOT know Lemaire was coming back... I only knew he was the only man who could pull it off and that was my trauma this whole time...how could Lou let Lemaire go like that? I just dont have balls that big. when you turn off the main power generator -- I mean what HUGE BALLS --

Thank you Jacques Lemaire for allowing Lou to turn of the power and then be there to help him turn it all on again. we couldn't re-boot without Jacques

[Pepperkorn]

Oh and Rolston is the personification of the way the System cows you. And he's also now - and I had NO IDEA it woudl happen - the personification of letting it go and gaining a real understanding of it all. I now understand Rolston's Devils curse!

Rolston was cowed by the system. System wigged him out. Jacques got him away from the organization and said See? You can play hockey and play it well and it makes no difference where you are -- let's go back to New Jersey! Then alternate Universe Evil System got hold of them both too! It almost look identical to the real System!

so we rebooted and ridded the team of Evil Alternate Universe System! and THAT is why we have no facial hair - it's the System with the goatee that's bad just like Star Trek!

Ok... maybe I took it a little too far now...

Edited by Pepperkorn, 11 February 2011 - 10:08 AM.

[RunninWithTheDevil]

Don't forget also Jaques and Rollie have been together for a while. The devils, then the wild, now the devils again. You think rolston had the same respect for a guy he played with as coach? No way

[Pepperkorn]

Don't forget also Jaques and Rollie have been together for a while. The devils, then the wild, now the devils again. You think rolston had the same respect for a guy he played with as coach? No way

Exactly -- that's what I'm saying... in Rolston we see how The System intimidates players in New Jersey -- when you take it out of NJ it loses it's reverence and players can just relax and play without thinking of having a set System to adhere too. as I relentlessly repeat - The System has to be a living thing. You can never pin anything on the System -- the System is not Trapping (or left wing lock or whathaveyou) the system is not defense first. The System is just a way to articulate what true hockey is without relying on finesse alone. Finesse alone creates incomplete one way players. The System is just solid two way play. Keeping the focus on hockey not hotdogging, or relying solely on one trick/talent etc. The System is not a one off - one trick pony that's what's so infuriating when people try to talk about it in certain terms!

Edited by Pepperkorn, 11 February 2011 - 12:09 PM.

[DaneykoIsGod]

Seems like an appropriate time to un-bury this thread.

“Rollie was standing up,” Lemaire said. “He wasn’t sitting and he was looking at me a lot. I knew he wanted to go and I’m glad that when he went, he scored.”

Without saying a word Rolston was able to convince Lemaire to let him shoot.

“He sold me,” Lemaire said. “He didn’t talk to me, but just the way he was I knew he wanted to go.”

“Of course I want to go,” Rolston said. “I used to go all the time and I haven’t been used too much since I’ve been here. But I wanted to go, absolutely.”

I don't know of a player the Devils have had who's had his heart questioned as much as Rolston's over the past few years. And the guy deserved it. He dogged it and looked like a guy content to just collect his checks and go through the motions.

But, like the rest of the team, he's playing out of his mind right now. He's actually winning foot races. He's digging along the boards. He's finishing checks. He's finding the open ice and he has linemates capable of getting him the puck. He's actually hitting the net when he gets that opportunity. He's effective on the PK. He's effective on the PP.

There isn't an element of his game that isn't dramatically better than what we've grown accustomed to over the past couple years. That alone is pretty remarkable. But then he goes and does something like this! Standing at the bench, giving his coach the look, wanting to be the guy. This is stuff that we ragged on Jagr for during his Rangers captain years ... not wanting to be the guy in a shootout. There's also the Trembley story regarding our old captain, if you choose to believe his story. Being the big guy in the big spot in a shootout is an ultimate pressure spot, so much so that people actively pass it up. One on one, all eyes on you. Rolston wanted it. And when Lemaire gave him the chance, he was cool as ice, making his move and winning the game.

I've ragged on the guy as much as anyone else. But I'm giving props now. Rolston, you're back to being Rollie or Winky or whatever you like. You're no longer Roger Dorn. For now.

[Pepperkorn]

See that is it... I can see it so clearly on the TV -- you know how I write about it all the time -- you see the guy who SEES it -- he sees something and he's your man. He's always the guy bouncing around on the bench like he drank 3 pints of beer on a diuretic. I LOVE TV coverage because you get to see those guys.... and I HATE TV coverage because they pan in on the WRONG THING most of the time

I can't be happier for Rolston. He's got his vision - maybe not all the way, but enough. Enough to know it' snot dumb luck -- he'a in control. I'm not saying that makes him a keeper or he's earning his $$$ but it's cleansing for him. I'm just so happy for him.

What's also pretty sweet about Jacques is I get the feeling he's VERY clear with his struggling guys -- this is not redemption, this is just you doing what you do - this is you in your natural state. What's ALSO really nice about that take on it.... some guys think "Natural state huh? OK then, let's take it up a notch" THEN Jacques got 'em right where he want's 'em!

[Pepperkorn]

You knwo what sucks -- Jacques is like the System.... you cannot second guess him. You have to remain that blank slate and take things in the time HE sees fit -- not what you THINK you see..... you have to sit tight and focus not ahead of where Jacque is -- because you really do NOT know where he's going -- that's probably the honest to goodness problem with Langenbrunner. He just got ahead of of it all too much -- too much anticipation not just plain doing listening. That's also what I mean about Jacques style having a shelf life.

Edited by Pepperkorn, 07 March 2011 - 09:13 AM.

[Korean Kid 23]

I've always supported Rollie. He's been one of my favs since day 1 in this organization. He was a class act about the whole being waived thing. I guess that lit a major fire under his ass. He's been playing out of his mind. I just wish he could have done this for the other 2 years. Oh well. If he becomes a huge part in helping this team magically get into the playoffs, that makes up for some of his lackadaisical play the first two seasons. He has 20 points in his last 24 games by the way.

[cubanjd305]

“He sold me,” Lemaire said. “He didn’t talk to me, but just the way he was I knew he wanted to go.”

“Of course I want to go,” Rolston said. “I used to go all the time and I haven’t been used too much since I’ve been here. But I wanted to go, absolutely.”

They should really specify they're talking about the shootout...those "wanted to go" can be misinterpreted

[DevilNurn]

What a great story last night was for Rolston. I'm happy for the guy.