So I guess Yehuda's mother was the recipient of a....
Jump to content
Posted by Colorado Rockies 1976 on 14 November 2013 - 01:36 PM
So I guess Yehuda's mother was the recipient of a....
Posted by Colorado Rockies 1976 on 12 November 2013 - 09:30 AM
i wouldnt in the way that there's already rumours about him going back to Russia + he already seem to be going against what the coach is saying. He's young and could improve but throwing lots of assets on another guy who could leave for the KHL fvck that. We've already lost so fvcking much without getting anything in return we absolutely cant take anymore chances.
I'd rather put my efforts on a Canadian/US guy.
Figured you'd find a way to work that in. Nice job.
Posted by Colorado Rockies 1976 on 06 November 2013 - 01:41 PM
Please God no. Oh wait, I don't believe in God. Damn!
Posted by Colorado Rockies 1976 on 02 November 2013 - 09:58 PM
Took my 5-year-old daughter to this one. Just me and her. Was hoping for so much better. I'm going to have a hell of a time indoctrinating her if I keep subjecting her to steaming piles of dung like this game.
Low shots on goal total was a little misleading, but only a little. The Devil still looked incredibly lifeless and out-of-sorts for most of the game, save for a select few. Sucks to see a good Marty start go to waste, and sometimes I feel like many of Jagr's current teammates aren't worthy of Jagr's hockey smarts or work ethic.
And god was the top row of 210 annoying as hell. Bunch of dummies who apparently can't handle a few beers without losing their friggin' minds.
Posted by Colorado Rockies 1976 on 01 November 2013 - 10:39 AM
A small percentage of spousal physical abuse is by women towards men. A much larger percentage is men towards women. The reason for all this leeway granted to women re: physical abuse is quite simple - men are bigger and stronger than women. Do some women abuse that status? Sure. It's a consequence of living in a more tolerant and just society.
CarterForPresident is of course wrong when he says that men are always hitting women - physical abuse of women has no doubt declined over the last 50 years, at least in the U.S. You just think it's increased because since it is rarer, it's now bigger news. Man hits woman would be 'Dog bites man' of the early 20th century in the U.S. (and indeed, is still the case in many parts of the world).
Re: this Varlamov stuff, who knows what exactly is true, but all the Russian hockey writers jumped on Twitter to defend him, which was rather odious.
I'm not going to say that women physically abusing men is a serious problem, but as far as percentage of actual REPORTED cases, if you could somehow tally every single incident of domestic abuse, the percentage of actual reported man-on-woman physical abuse in relation to actual incidents of such is higher than the other way around, and for obvious reasons...men being afraid of the stigmas that will go with calling in such an incident, etc.
Say a woman smacks a man in the face twice. Technically, that IS assault. Will the man call the police? Probably not. It's also unlikely that the people around him will pressure him to report it, even if he has visible marks on his face.
Man does the same to a woman...she is more likely to call it in. If she doesn't want to, people around her will likely threaten to report it themselves, even more so if she has visible marks on his face.
Not even really disputing your original percentage statement (man-on-woman violence definitely happens more), but just stating that woman-on-man violence happens far more often than is ever documented.
Posted by Colorado Rockies 1976 on 01 November 2013 - 09:55 AM
I tend to agree, the fact of no mention of innocent until proven guilty has come up yet is bothersome.
Who the hell knows what happened? Nobody here is defending hitting women, it's trying to evaluate if it even happened.
What CR is hitting at is, because this is man on woman, we take it and assume it happened just as she told the story. Looking at it if a woman domestically abused a man, it would be a joke to us. Nobody here is saying "well she had it coming." Far from that.
Actually, the thread-of-consciousness I'm posting on isn't even about the Varlamov situation specifically (said this in my first post). It was more addressing something Carter-for-president said in a post, a blanket statement about how too many men are hitting women. In a perfect world, no one would resort to violence ever. But what I was pointing out was that every case isn't always about some guy just beating a woman senseless...and I think that's how most people view domestic abuse...very black-and-white.
Posted by Colorado Rockies 1976 on 01 November 2013 - 08:37 AM
No, because divorce or simply moving out is considered the legal avenue to take.
I understand the above, but say you're a married man who's bringing home most of the money...much of which has gone into a beautiful home, and other perks (pool, cars, tec). Your wife can be pretty horrible in many ways...maybe withholding sex, constantly bitching and complaining, always making you feel like nothing you ever do is good enough. She is constantly nagging you, and thinks nothing of embarrassing you in front of others. Eventually you start fighting back, and the arguments get worse and worse. Then one day, things get out of control, and your wife hits you, maybe once, maybe multiple times. You snap and maybe not even technically "hit" her, but you push or shove her. She falls, maybe gets a bump on her head, bruise on her back. She calls the police. How do you think this is going to turn out for you?
Sure, you take the "legal" avenue. The house that you worked so hard to buy? She's going to get it. And chances are not only are you going to lose the house, but you're now going have to pay her alimony too. It's not nearly as easy to just leave as outsiders might think.
And how is any of the above fair to you exactly? Men often get screwed royally by going the "legal" route.
Posted by Colorado Rockies 1976 on 30 October 2013 - 06:44 AM
It represents way more than 1% of people who submitted votes though. The fans that post on these forums are probably more dedicated than most, and so are the ones that send in goal song submissions. If you think these were actually the top three in votes, even disregarding Rock and Roll Part 2, then you are way too gullible. It seemed clear to me from the get-go that even though they said they were going to test out the three most voted songs, it was obviously going to be three songs that they found suitable. Just like when you needed to register for a ticket for the equipment sale at the draft a few years ago, but after registering it just took you to a webpage to print out your ticket, all of which had the exact same barcode and number. It was just a ploy to get more email addresses into their database. Did you really think someone was sitting there tallying every vote for every single song? Come on, now.
In bold: yeah, pretty much. The only thing that's really aggravating about it all is the way it continues to get handled. All they had to do was announce that they were dumping R&R Part 2 in the preseason, then follow that up with "and here's the three songs that are candidates to replace it. We'll play song#1 at the first home game, song#2 at the next one, then song#3 at the following one. We will use the one that gets the most positive reaction."
But, as we know, we got:
1) R&R Part 2 playing during preseason, which led many to think no changes were coming.
2) Blindsided at Opening Night with a song that seemed to be implemented only because the artist had New Jersey ties, which was an insult to several Jersey folk. Nothing like new owners who appear to regard their fans as nothing more than a homogenous stereotype who worships anything branded New Jersey.
3) In reaction to the disaster above (which had ownership had anyone do even miminal research, they would have seen that coming), the Devils allowed fans to enter their own choices. Though several fans were still pissed at the blindside maneuver, several others applauded this "recovery" move, and were willing to submit good ideas (though some clearly weren't going to let go of R&R Part 2...that's on the fans).
4) Then it becomes obvious that the "YOU pick your song!" thing was a sham, and that the Devils were going to pick three songs that were clearly less far disastrous than "This Is Our House" (this time I'm sure SOME organizational research went into the three choices). Fine...hell, two of the three songs are light-years better than "This Is Our House"...but most people can see through this pretty easily, which makes we wonder why the Devils didn't just come out and be honest with their fanbase JUST ONCE since this whole thing began.
It always goes back to the same thing...even though several Devils fans wouldn't have liked the sacking of R&R Part 2 the second it was announced, and some would then refuse to give anything else a real chance, if the Devils had just been honest about how they were handling this just ONE DAMNED TIME, fans would be a lot less annoyed by all of this now. Maybe not happy and thrilled, but definitely less aggravated.
Posted by Colorado Rockies 1976 on 23 October 2013 - 06:57 AM
In order for it to work, Schneider has to play 45-50. Originally, I thought if you split him and Marty 41/41 that would be perfect. It's really tough to do what they're doing because of Marty's Hall Of Fame career. It must be very humbling for a man that not long ago, had your team eyeing a storybook comeback against the Kings. I think until their defense steadies (DeBoer-Harrold session, Volchenkov), it won't matter who's in net. Obviously, Schneider is the better puck stopper at this point. The lack of mobility is a concern. Plus you need the offense (Zajac, Henrique) to come around. Elias' return should help.
I am going to echo your sentiments regarding the Elite 3 (Brodeur, Hasek, Roy). Marty being the most consistent having longevity along with the records (wins, shutouts, appearances). He also has that streak of 40 wins or more and 30-plus that probably will never be duplicated. Dominator for me was unbelievable. The unorthodox style he played, it was like watching a slinky. And he was small. I remember seeing him before that snowstorm game in February '01. I marveled at what he could do. That was the game Rafalski tied it after the buzzer. Very tough driving hazards. It's hard to say how many more wins, shutouts he might've had. You can only marvel at the talent. He definitely benefited from moving to Detroit. But those Buffalo teams had little talent. Roy won 2 with Montreal and 2 with Colorado. The ones with the Avs were easier. They had much more talent. He wowed as a rook the same year Claude Lemieux started his playoff reputation. '93 was the best one. All the crazy overtimes. Another unbreakable record.
Brodeur's best moments:
1.2003-backstopped team past a loaded Sens and stood up to the pressure in the home series vs Ducks.
2.2012-I have to put this second because nobody gave them a shot. They beat 3 higher seeds (Panthers, Flyers, Rangers). And he got the better of Lundqvist at 40. Remarkable. Bitter pill to swallow. And he gave the Devils a shot in that final. Just didn't score enough.
3.1994-I still put this pretty high on my list due to the caliber goaltending display. He was unbelievable. A star was born.
4.2000-That was a tougher road than '95. Leafs/Devils Part I was intense. Then dethroning the champion Stars in a goalie duel against Eddie. Vintage stuff.
5.1995-Most probably have this higher because it was his first Cup. I never understood why the Red Wings were heavy favorites. It was the Devils who lost in a classic ECF versus us. The Wings lost to the Sharks. They had the experience. It showed. It took Detroit 2 more years.
6.Olympic Gold '02 Salt Lake. If you're a pure hockey fan, this will probably be in the top 3. Canada's drought. And he took over for Cujo and finally led Canada to gold in a classic against Team USA. A great Olympic moment.
You could rank the other records and round out your top 10. I guess for a Devil fan, it would look different. I think it shouldn't matter how he goes out. He's a legend. Even if I didn't say the right thing regarding the Henrik stuff, you have to admire Brodeur. He shouldn't be run out of town. I'd still rather have him backing up than most. Maybe he'll surprise you. When he retires, the rivalry loses some of its appeal. It already started with Schneider getting the start Saturday. It won't be the same.
I think DeBoer and others envisioned a split going into the season...even Marty getting slightly more starts...but I also think they weren't going to wait long to deviate from that idea if Marty struggled, especially when you factor in everything else: Devils not making the playoffs last season, Marty not looking good in the second half of the year (but getting starts because the other guy was even worse), having a good young goalie on the roster. I think if Marty's at roughly .900 in save% and has a couple of wins under his belt, maybe the loose split would've continued a bit longer. But his rough start (and more importantly, the WAY he looked during it) made the decision relatively easy for DeBoer.
That being said, goaltending is hardly the only issue for the Devils at this point. They look to be a team that is going to be inconsistent (at best) when it comes to putting pucks in the net. The names don't appear to be meshing. Schneider playing at his current best will lead to more points than Brodeur playing at his current best, but with the way the team looks right now, Hasek, Roy, or Brodeur in their primes would have a tough time getting this team into the playoffs.
I would love it if Brodeur could provide capable backup goaltending, but the simple fact is, no one knows if he can do it. He's never really been a backup before. If his skills are declining as sharply as they appear to be, I don't know how playing less will stave that off. My expectations are pretty fair for Brodeur at this point...I'm not asking him to be anywhere near what he was in his prime. If he can finish with overall numbers close to last season's (.900ish save%), in about 25 games, and get through with roughly an NHL-.500 record, I'd be thrilled with that. Not great numbers, but at least they're passable.
You've got your share of mean-spirited Devils fans who do a better job of ripping on Brodeur than Rangers fans ever did, but don't misinterpret as people not wanting to see it get ugly for him as people wanting to run him out of town. There's fans who literally grew up watching Marty from the time they were little kids just getting into Devils hockey. Then there's guys like me who remember the Devils pre-Marty, and have been watching him do his often-awesome thing seemingly forever (I was 21 and still in college when he made his debut in '91...I'm now 43, married, and a dad). To see him look so beatable and old is really hard for some of us to take. Re: 2012, I think he gave it all in those 2012 playoffs...gave it just about everything he had left. The way he finished up the 2011-12 regular season and playoffs as a 39/40-year-old was pretty amazing, it really was. .923 save% over that season's final 27 games, .922 save% in the playoffs (until Game 6 of the SCF, which knocked it down to .917). In four of the six '11-'12 SC Final games, he gave up just one goal in regulation. I've said it many times, but I think that stretch was the best of the rest of what he had left. I do feel like the tank is just about empty now though...especially since this looks like a Devils team incapable of propping him up, and willing him to more wins. I agree, that despite what some of the Brodeur critics say, him going out struggling this season shouldn't, and likely won't, make much difference...there's guys who have gone out much more painfully in other sports (Mickey Mantle admitted that part of the reason he hung on, despite knowing he didn't have it anymore, was because the lucrative Yankees lifetime achievement contracts were giving him were simply too good to pass up, even though he couldn't come close to earning their worth...but those seasons cost him his .300 lifetime batting average), but fans do remember all of the great moments much more than the final ones. In a few years, fans will focus on the many great moments up until the 2012 SCF, with this season and last being mere footnotes.
Posted by Colorado Rockies 1976 on 21 October 2013 - 01:20 PM
..because the 6-10 remark is the part that matters CR!
A homer won't acknowledge the negative, rarely admits they're wrong, and defiantly insists that team\players\things worked after the notion, despite the fact that they didn't. They adamantly insist, in the face of defeat. If their team does something that fails, they ignore it. They swoon every move\trade\signing their organization makes. They go in hiding when their team loses.. they praise them even in defeat.. and refuse to give anyone else credit, other than their own franchise.
Maybe implying that you are a blind homer wasn't fair on my part. I went back through some posts, and in fairness, though you occasionally do some homeristic things (like the Jet 4-1 thing), your Jet prediction posts are more based on seeing the glass 3/4 full than anything else...optimism, which I can understand and relate to. And you at least try to give reasons behind the optimism, even if some of them (like Tebow/Sanchez working) seem like a stretch.
Burying the hatchet and wiping the slate clean Beez.
Posted by Colorado Rockies 1976 on 20 October 2013 - 08:51 AM
Marty is a classless tool. But so far, he's been proven right. Hank has let in a lot of uncharacteristic goals. The team hasn't played well in front of him. When he doesn't stand on his head, the Rangers are a lottery team. Especially when you take away Callahan.
Yep, here we go again with the cheap shots. The patented Derek21 meltdown shouldn't be too far behind.
It's a Devils website genius...do you think it's a real good idea to come on here and call the greatest player in this franchise's history "a classless tool"? Surely you can go do that on some Rangers site where you can all crack jokes about Marty's weight and call his team the "Debbies"...Ranger fans have always been such cut-ups that way.
The reason a lot of the board would like to see Brodeur retire is not because they don't respect him or his resume (though some Devils fans definitely have short memories)...it's because no one wants to see it get ugly for him (though it kind of already has)...it's been discussed in various threads, but no one really enjoys watching a long-time legend struggle to barely be a shell of what he was. That being said, as Marty likely thinks he's still got something left, and the franchise is not ever going to embarrass him, he'll play out this final season and hopefully do it as a passable level. Probably won't be pretty, but it's a small price to pay for everything he's given the Devils over two decades, and if Schneider can continue to do what he has so far, Marty shouldn't get much more than 25 games.
Posted by Colorado Rockies 1976 on 18 October 2013 - 07:28 AM
This is what really worries me. If he keeps playing in short stints he will blame his performance on that, if you give him a run in the team as the starter and he still doesn’t perform for a few games it will be, "I’m just finding my form" .
The mind-set he has, which has made him the incredible Goalie and athlete we have had the privilege of watching for so long, is probably going to be the thing that will hold him in the game to long.
Part of me hopes that he see Patrick Roy having success as a head coach in Colorado and he thinks " I could be a better head coach than Patrick, let’s get that going”.
This is where it can ugly with the fading legends. A lot of them can't differentiate what was and what is, and that puts their organization in the awkward position of having to do it for them.
I am sure Marty still thinks he's got it in him to be the #1, and thinks he just needs time and starts. And though I wouldn't be thrilled about it, if the team was scoring some goals and not having issues on a number of other fronts, I could see why the Devils might want to give Marty one last shot at being the #1, or the #1A to Schneider's #1B.
But clearly, they can't do that...this team is already feeling some pressure, and when it's 2-0 before you can blink because your goalie isn't stopping stoppable shots, that "Here we go again" feeling starts coming up in a hurry. When Marty was kind of a "meh" puck stopper during the regular season (from '98-'99 to '01-'02), his teammates always maintained that, when needed, he would still make the BIG saves, and as the '00 and '03 Cup runs showed, he could raise his game significantly, so even if his save% from those seasons (.906, .910, .906, .906...all below his career .913) weren't great on paper, his teammates still felt like they could count on him.
And for those who are saying "Don't give up on Marty"...no one WANTS to give up on him, but this isn't 2005-06, where he started slowly and some misguided fans wanted to bail on him. Like many have pointed out, the last three seasons for him have been inconsistent, and he is finally showing real signs of decline. I've pointed out that he had that nice stretch of play as a 39 and 40-year-old to close out the 2011-12 season and playoffs. Last season was pretty meh at best, and this season is looking like more of the same. To Marty's credit, there have been times post 2004-2005 lockout where some people did want to give up on him, and he's fought back every time. What he did in 2012 was terrific, it really was...kind of like his last stand against the aging process that sadly robs even the best players of their skills. But who really thinks he has another fight like that left in him? He has played 1429 games in the NHL. No other goalie is even close to that (Roy is at 1276). How many 41-year-old goalies in the NHL defy nature's ugly side?
It's fine if fans want to root for him and hope for the best...I would never root AGAINST him...but as much as I've always been firmly in his corner, I can't just blindly believe in him anymore.
Posted by Colorado Rockies 1976 on 17 October 2013 - 08:52 AM
Name me one current Dman that one of his strength/skill was not there at all when he got in the league. Other than experience and stuff like that.
Sure thing. Sheldon Souray scored 23 goals in 152 WHL games. He followed that up with 9 goals in his first 4 pro seasons. He's scored 102 NHL goals since then. I don't think anyone associated with the Devils ever suspected that he would become a PP1 option with his shot.
Zdeno Chara scored 3 goals in his first WHL season. He scored 4 goals in his first pro season. It took him until his Y23 season to score a significant number of points, and he, like Souray, has been a PP1 option for a decade.
Seems pretty cut-and-dried.
I get into it with Tri from time-to-time (as does almost everyone here), but even when I don't agree with what his opinions are, I can at least understand what his point actually is.
The problem SD is that you are SO bad at debating and presenting your points that your debating/arguing "style" (if I can even call it that) and how poor it is winds up becoming a debate in itself. And take a look...it's not like it's ONE guy who's telling you this. You've had the same issue with multiple posters on multiple threads. That should be a clear sign to you that it's not everyone else that's the problem here (which you seem to think it is).
Posted by Colorado Rockies 1976 on 16 October 2013 - 02:48 PM
well well... just as i made a point pretty clear not to focus on what i said about that one guy and just take the general meaning of what i said... guess who comes out and do exactly what i said not to do... *clap clap*
Ever think that maybe you're just really REALLY bad at trying to make points re: most things Devils? It always the same with you...you try to make a point in the worst way possible (usually with extreme over-the-top examples, like what you just did), people dare to pick your statements apart, then it's everyone else's fault for not understanding what you're trying to go for.
Posted by Colorado Rockies 1976 on 16 October 2013 - 10:10 AM
was looking at hf boards and have to wonder what the age of there posters are because most sound like little babies complaining, threatening to never go to the pru center again or another devils home game.
"kings county KING - How does going to away games amount to not supporting your team? I don't support the new corporate regime that Blitzer and Harris have established in the last few months. They run Prudential Center. So, I won't go to Prudential Center. Not for hockey. Not for WWE. Not for concerts. Not for basketball. I own several Devils jerseys. What motivation do I have to hand them my hard-earned money, when they don't care about you or I? Vanderbeek was one of us. They are not."
I care about the players, and I'll cheer their goals in person. In New York and Pennsylvania.all of this because of a goal song thats changing and you cant say 'you suck".
VBK was most definitely one of us. None of us could afford to run the Devils either.