Posted by NJDevs4978
on 22 January 2015 - 04:03 PM
And I get so sick and tired of hearing RATINGS RATINGS RATINGS justifying the same six teams in these games here. We're not talking about Super Bowl ratings for crying out loud, the difference would probably be miniscule. And putting the same six teams in the game is going to run the concept into the ground faster than if they spread it out.
Let Canada rotate a game every year for the Heritage Classic, you can spread out the small market representation with games that'll get megaratings in Canada even if it's Edmonton-Calgary and let the US have a game for the New Year's Day. Make it so you can't host a game more than once every ten years and play in more than two games every ten years on New Year's.
Posted by NJDevs4978
on 18 January 2015 - 06:57 PM
As a theory I don't mind the extra teams to get more players in, but what exactly would you CALL them? There's no simple nickname for either of these teams...European All-Stars? Young Stars? Leftovers? The first two are misnomers cause other nations obviously have European players and younger players as well. They might as well just have the big six, then have one smaller nation win a spot and have one other miscellaneous All-Star team instead of two miscellaneous teams.
As others have pointed out small nations playing the big teams is the only way they're going to improve their programs in the long run. It wasn't any fun watching the US Dream Team beat Angola by 80 points, but after a generation a lot of other nations have improved their basketball to where the US can be beat in any Olympics/WC.
Posted by NJDevs4978
on 26 December 2014 - 03:58 PM
I said let them go to free agency... Did kovy went to free agency yes or no? Right.
Just stop...please. Kovy 'went to free agency' when we traded for him as a rental to win a Stanley Cup. What were they going to do, sign him when he got off the plane from Atlanta? They had to use the 30 games plus playoffs as a trial period to see if he was going to work out enough for them to give big money to (and for him to want to stay here). That - and him bolting on a signed contract to go to Russia - are both VASTLY different than Parise leaving. And even he was more or less a rental to try to win a Cup too, which nearly worked.
Besides this is the coaching thread, don't hijack it with your broken record agenda.
Posted by NJDevs4978
on 21 October 2014 - 09:42 PM
Tonight might have been the worst coached game I've seen since Julien left Madden on the bench twice for key shifts against Jagr when he scored two third-period goals and beat us late. Every time I want to give Pete another chance and buy the bull**** about him being a great mind and all that, he does **** like putting Gionta out in the final minute of a tie game in the offensive zone, putting our slowest players on the ice in a 4-on-4 situation, or using Zidlicky as the 'defensive replacement' for Larsson.
Posted by NJDevs4978
on 25 September 2014 - 04:47 PM
I was opposed to the Locker Room subforum back then because the off-topic section wasn't so busy that sports talk got in the way of general off-topic threads, it made it take longer to navigate to the sports conversation, and it made it an additional page you needed to check if you were interested in talking about other sports with the people on here. Now, you can get to the Locker Room without having to go through Off-Topic first, but it still makes no sense for it to be a separate subforum because off-topic is even more of a deserted void than it used to be. Right now the Locker Room and Off-Topic have a combined total of five threads that have been posted in over the past week, so separating them doesn't have any benefit and only makes the forum more segmented than it needs to be.
Also, it may be a longshot but a theory could be made that allowing the sports talk in the off-topic section could bring the forum a little back towards its more civil and personal days. I feel like the off-topic section was where we got to know each other better, and taking discussions away from there has made off-topic less visited, and the lack of visitors is probably why nobody posts the fun off-topic threads we used to have because it is likely nobody will even see them.
Funny you should bring up the Locker Room and act like it's causing the board deterioration, I think the sports folder is pretty much the only place on the forum that hasn't been contaminated into a 'posters x and y bashing each other' and 'have the same argument z' the way the hockey forum has been in recent years, and you still have fun, intelligent banter/discussions in the football threads, the Mets thread in baseball and the other random threads that pop up there occasionally. Precisely because the poster base there is smaller. When you have more traffic on a site, you're going to get more of the whiny element, it's just the way it is. That's why the Devils' Facebook is a wasteland...too much random traffic.
As far as why there isn't more off-topic posting, well part of it is just the people who were posting Off-Topic back then aren't on the forum anymore period for one reason or another. You had younger posters then that are in a different place in their life and older posters that are just tired of the board...trust me I know, the longer you post in a particular place the more jaded you get about the board itself. And the other part of it is the internet's different than it was even five years ago. There are so many specialized sites out there to talk about whatever you want. Twitter's exploded, Facebook's become bigger, there are a million more sites and hundreds of outlets to talk about whatever you want to online strangers. Not wanting to scroll down an extra second to find Off-Topic isn't a valid reason why there isn't OT discussion. It exists on the forum, it's there for when people want to use it, it's just not the first thing people are going to look for and jump into if they're new posters and see very little activity there.
To get to Tri's point, it really depends on the thread/purpose of it. You could take a page out of HF's book and have certain stickied threads that get long (an Albany thread, a STH thread as Colin said). Other threads could be more specialized and talk about specific things that happen and articles that get posted. Rock used to post all the articles, now nobody's really taken that mantle. And nobody wants to start threads based on Tweets. That's I suppose another place where having a longer team specific thread like HF might help, Tweets get posted there and that fosters discussion.
I agree the Rock forum's pretty much outlived its usefulness imo, it was created when the Prudential Center first opened with new info about Newark, and it was useful. Now you could probably just devote thread(s) to the surrounding area here.
It's amazing how Marty says a bunch of good things in the article like this
“A lot of the conversation I had with him was to make sure we need to take care of Schneids,” Brodeur said. “I think that’s the main goal he has to worry about from my point of view. I’m sure he’s thinking the same. He’s been pretty open about it as far as wanting to get Cory back and signed and lock him in so they don’t have to worry about a goalie for six, seven more years. And it was the same in some of the conversations I had with him. So, it wasn’t really about a role (for him) or whatever, but, again, at his age, (Schneider) needs to start playing more hockey and see if he can take the load of 70-something games that I was able to do for so many years.
“Me and Lou, we have a great relationship and I think we understand both sides of the medal here,” Brodeur said. “For me, the future of the Devils is a lot more important than my future.”
And yet the only thing that gets attention around here is the blurb that Lou is probably going to wait to see what Marty does (which granted is a bit disconcerting unless that means they have enough confidence in Kinkaid that if Marty doesn't return it's likely he'll start the season as a backup if all the good backups are signed by the time Marty goes somewhere else). Which causes people to rag on Marty again.
Yes I didn't like the way he was popping off during the season but it's over now. He knows the deal here and he's been dare I say back to his old self personality-wise since the season ended.
Yes, Quick's stats are not up to par, but you all are missing the the fact that Quick has face more shots than anyone in the playoffs....Quick has faced almost 80 more shots than Lundquist. Is it the team bailing Quick out? Or maybe the Kings suck at defense. Yes, SV% is a huge part of the argument, but its difficult for a goalie to maintain a high SV% when he faces a high volume of shots every night and Quick has made some amazing saves in the Chicago series, despite his shoddy SV%, one stop on the Hawks on a big chance very late in the 3rd.
Quick's also played one more game and a bunch of OT's. The Rangers have had two short OT's in the entire playoffs.