MadDog2020 Posted January 31, 2017 Author Share Posted January 31, 2017 http://deadsp.in/WtsoZhgSent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antiquated Colorado Rockie Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 2 hours ago, MadDog2020 said: http://deadsp.in/WtsoZhg Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk la Islanders. Actually they will probably end up back at the smaller version of Nassau as the least evil option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfitz804 Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 I think they are still hoping the Wilpons will build them an arena near Citi Field. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecoffeecake Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 20 hours ago, MadDog2020 said: Yeah I definitely think it would be overkill- you'd have the Rock, the Garden, Barclays, and the Queens arena all within about 12 miles of each other. And that doesn't even consider the two baseball stadiums and Met Life in the mix as well. I don't know how it could work, but time will tell I guess... I think the best case scenario (although the least likely I'd imagine) would be to up the capacity in the renovated Coliseum so it's NHL-acceptable and move the Islanders back to Nassau County where they should be, and where they rightfully belong. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk This would be my perfect scenario (as well as most Islanders fans I imagine), but it's definitely very unlikely. I imagine it's difficult to change the plans for the capacity, but the owners also bought the team as they were heading for NYC, as some article I read pointed out. They invested in a NYC product, and I imagine they want to keep the team in the boroughs somehow. They might turn around and sell instead of limp back to the Island. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 I can imagine if the new owners really wanted to keep the team in NYC but in a new stadium that they would pretty much have to pay for most if not all of it. I have a feeling that taxpayers are not going to be too keen to have to shell out again for another new arena after the Barclays saga. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDog2020 Posted February 1, 2017 Author Share Posted February 1, 2017 Hitchcock out in St. LouisSent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck the Duck Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 They are in a really tough spot. If their fans weren't so douchey the past few years, I might actually feel bad for them. The Islanders should be on LI. The move to Brooklyn made no practical sense from day 1, and alienated a large portion of their fanbase. I've read that the renovated Coliseum can expand seating to 15,000. If that's the case, then it seems like that will be their only real option at this point, other than agreeing to renegotiate with Barclays on the terms of their deal, which will only get worse from the team. The only problem is that the new Coliseum still wont have the luxury boxes other arenas have to generate large amounts of revenue. Also, the Isles won't get the revenue stream that teams like the Devils get from operating the arena and taking in money from all events held there since Barclays runs the Coliseum now. Like DM84 has said, there is going to be no public appetite for public funds to be sunk into another arena in this area. The Wilpons sure as hell aren't building one next to Citifield without substantial public investment, and I doubt the new owners are going to shell out over $500 million for a new arena to put on top of the debt they have from the purchase of the team. This is a no win situation for them, although I still don't think they will move out of this area to places like Quebec, Hamilton, or Seattle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eaglejelly Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 23 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said: I can imagine if the new owners really wanted to keep the team in NYC but in a new stadium that they would pretty much have to pay for most if not all of it. I have a feeling that taxpayers are not going to be too keen to have to shell out again for another new arena after the Barclays saga. I'm afraid its going to be like the last years of the Nets in NJ where they were a lame duck organization. They still have to play 2 1/2 years in that Arena. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 Has a team that have previously won Stanley Cups ever move from their original market? I don't think I can think of any and would be strange if the Islanders did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roomtemp Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 10 minutes ago, eaglejelly said: I'm afraid its going to be like the last years of the Nets in NJ where they were a lame duck organization. They still have to play 2 1/2 years in that Arena. It could go better as they wouldn't suck out loud like the Nets did and the old Long Island fanbase would be more accepting of a move to say Queens if that's where they might go then what ever Nets fanbase there was with NJ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewarkDevil5 Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 1 hour ago, DevsMan84 said: Has a team that have previously won Stanley Cups ever move from their original market? I don't think I can think of any and would be strange if the Islanders did. To answer the question (because when you asked I got curious and looked it up), the only 2 NHL teams that have won the Stanley Cup that are not still in the city they originally won in are the Montreal Maroons (they went defunct due to the Great Depression in 1938) and the original Ottawa Senators (they are the only ones to have attempted moving, they moved to St Louis (Eagles) 1934 for a season and went defunct a year later). No modern NHL Stanley Cup winning team has ever moved out of their metropolitan area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colorado Rockies 1976 Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 Just now, NewarkDevil5 said: To answer the question (because when you asked I got curious and looked it up), the only 2 NHL teams that have won the Stanley Cup that are not still in the city they originally won in are the Montreal Maroons (they went defunct due to the Great Depression in 1938) and the original Ottawa Senators (they are the only ones to have attempted moving, they moved to St Louis (Eagles) 1934 for a season and went defunct a year later). No modern NHL Stanley Cup winning team has ever moved out of their metropolitan area. Re: current day Ottawa, always cracked me up that they claim those original Senators Cup wins as part of their history. Always found that very strange. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobilly45 Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 1 hour ago, Chuck the Duck said: They are in a really tough spot. If their fans weren't so douchey the past few years, I might actually feel bad for them. The Islanders should be on LI. The move to Brooklyn made no practical sense from day 1, and alienated a large portion of their fanbase. I've read that the renovated Coliseum can expand seating to 15,000. If that's the case, then it seems like that will be their only real option at this point, other than agreeing to renegotiate with Barclays on the terms of their deal, which will only get worse from the team. The only problem is that the new Coliseum still wont have the luxury boxes other arenas have to generate large amounts of revenue. Also, the Isles won't get the revenue stream that teams like the Devils get from operating the arena and taking in money from all events held there since Barclays runs the Coliseum now. Like DM84 has said, there is going to be no public appetite for public funds to be sunk into another arena in this area. The Wilpons sure as hell aren't building one next to Citifield without substantial public investment, and I doubt the new owners are going to shell out over $500 million for a new arena to put on top of the debt they have from the purchase of the team. This is a no win situation for them, although I still don't think they will move out of this area to places like Quebec, Hamilton, or Seattle. The seats can easily be re-added as the arena has the same footprint and dimensions as the old nvmc. Also the old boxes still exist,...they are just closed off and boarded up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicomo Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 8 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said: Re: current day Ottawa, always cracked me up that they claim those original Senators Cup wins as part of their history. Always found that very strange. Kind of like Cleveland Browns fans bragging about their pre-merger football championships, despite the fact that franchise is in Baltimore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecoffeecake Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 11 hours ago, Nicomo said: Kind of like Cleveland Browns fans bragging about their pre-merger football championships, despite the fact that franchise is in Baltimore. Who cares what happened to that exact business structure. Those championships belong to Cleveland and the Browns. The Senators thing is obviously a little different, but I don't have a problem with the current team claiming the history. 12 hours ago, roomtemp said: It could go better as they wouldn't suck out loud like the Nets did and the old Long Island fanbase would be more accepting of a move to say Queens if that's where they might go then what ever Nets fanbase there was with NJ. The Nets were lame duck for like 8 years, it can't get much worse than it did for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDog2020 Posted February 2, 2017 Author Share Posted February 2, 2017 The Nets were lame duck for like 8 years, it can't get much worse than it did for them. The Browns' history, records, and trademarks were all left with the city of Cleveland when the franchise moved as well- the plan was that the Browns would return as an expansion team a few years later. The Ravens began as a brand new franchise with its own history and records independent of the original Cleveland franchise. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 22 hours ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said: Re: current day Ottawa, always cracked me up that they claim those original Senators Cup wins as part of their history. Always found that very strange. Or how the Canucks wear the Millionaires jersey. That's a team that didn't even play in the NHL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colorado Rockies 1976 Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 11 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said: Or how the Canucks wear the Millionaires jersey. That's a team that didn't even play in the NHL. What made the whole Ottawa "let's just claim the old Sens' history as our own" thing memorable for me was that I remember some Ottawa fans actually saying "Our team has won more Cups than yours!" during the times the Devils faced them in the playoffs. All I could think was "Are you fvcking SERIOUS with that?!" 10 hours ago, MadDog2020 said: The Browns' history, records, and trademarks were all left with the city of Cleveland when the franchise moved as well- the plan was that the Browns would return as an expansion team a few years later. The Ravens began as a brand new franchise with its own history and records independent of the original Cleveland franchise. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk As far as that goes...I get it to some extent, but it's kind of weird that players who played as both the "old" Browns and Ravens are almost seen as having played for two different franchises...while the "new" Browns technically have nothing in common with the original Browns, outside of the unis and team nickname. I've always felt that former Rockies and Scouts players should have their stats listed with Devils players (you had Scouts who played as Rockies, Rockies who played as Devils, and one guy in Mike Kitchen who was a part of all them (drafted as a Scout, played for the Rockies and Devils)). To me, Wilf Paiement's 41 goals in '76-'77 and 87 points in '77-'78 should be on the all-time franchise leaderboard, for single-season rankings. That (and everything else Scouts and Rockies-related) are part of the franchise history. The Devils have finally acknowledged some of their pre-NJ past (the murals and jerseys on display at the Rock), but they still operate as though the franchise debuted in 1982-83 as some kind of expansion team. It's not a huge deal really, just something I've never really agreed with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 1 hour ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said: What made the whole Ottawa "let's just claim the old Sens' history as our own" thing memorable for me was that I remember some Ottawa fans actually saying "Our team has won more Cups than yours!" during the times the Devils faced them in the playoffs. All I could think was "Are you fvcking SERIOUS with that?!" As far as that goes...I get it to some extent, but it's kind of weird that players who played as both the "old" Browns and Ravens are almost seen as having played for two different franchises...while the "new" Browns technically have nothing in common with the original Browns, outside of the unis and team nickname. I've always felt that former Rockies and Scouts players should have their stats listed with Devils players (you had Scouts who played as Rockies, Rockies who played as Devils, and one guy in Mike Kitchen who was a part of all them (drafted as a Scout, played for the Rockies and Devils)). To me, Wilf Paiement's 41 goals in '76-'77 and 87 points in '77-'78 should be on the all-time franchise leaderboard, for single-season rankings. That (and everything else Scouts and Rockies-related) are part of the franchise history. The Devils have finally acknowledged some of their pre-NJ past (the murals and jerseys on display at the Rock), but they still operate as though the franchise debuted in 1982-83 as some kind of expansion team. It's not a huge deal really, just something I've never really agreed with. I agree. I think the current Jets acknowledge the achievements of players during the time they were in Atlanta and I also believe the Flames acknowledge the achievements of their players during their time in Atlanta as well. I also think Carolina does this as well. I am not saying the Devils should wear throwback Scouts or Rockies jerseys, but at least acknowledge that they weren't like you said an expansion team in 1982. With the McMullen logo it looks like the team might be finally heading in the direction of recognizing that the team existed prior to their move to NJ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevils1214 Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 I'm REALLY REALLY REALLY surprised the NHL isn't doing anything about the latest Marchand slewfoot. The guy plays with reckless abandon and his continued dirty play can only signal he has no concern for the consequences of his actions. For some players the consequences of a dirty play or broken rule can last a lifetime. You don't even have to look back that far to see the Matt Cooke hit on Marc Savard that ended his career. On the street, his actions would be criminal. Does the NHL wait until he ends someones career to reel him in? I've never seen a player before with such talent, yet felt the need to frequently play with tactics widely considered so "below the belt". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDfan1711 Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 55 minutes ago, NJDevils1214 said: I'm REALLY REALLY REALLY surprised the NHL isn't doing anything about the latest Marchand slewfoot. The guy plays with reckless abandon and his continued dirty play can only signal he has no concern for the consequences of his actions. For some players the consequences of a dirty play or broken rule can last a lifetime. You don't even have to look back that far to see the Matt Cooke hit on Marc Savard that ended his career. On the street, his actions would be criminal. Does the NHL wait until he ends someones career to reel him in? I've never seen a player before with such talent, yet felt the need to frequently play with tactics widely considered so "below the belt". Got a link? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crisis Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 7 minutes ago, NJDfan1711 said: Got a link? I think it's in this compilation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Brown Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 I hope Ray gets Gelinas back. If Moore is gonna be out, we could really use Gelinas on the PP. He's not nearly as bad as people think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDog2020 Posted February 2, 2017 Author Share Posted February 2, 2017 I hope Ray gets Gelinas back. If Moore is gonna be out, we could really use Gelinas on the PP. He's not nearly as bad as people think. fvck that. Gelinas is terrible. Moore's been out for a month and hasn't been the least bit missed. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDfan1711 Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 2 hours ago, Crisis said: I think it's in this compilation Which incident was the recent one that you were referring to though? Looking at that video compilation though, that's insane that he's done that so many times. To be honest, it almost looks like that's how he was taught to skate and go into hits. Not saying it's OK by any means, but he sure does a good job selling it and making it look "normal" and as if it was an accident. What was wrong with the hit at the 1 minute mark though? It looked like a clean hip check to me. And I loved at about the 2:40 mark the Penguin player axe chopped him with his stick after he tried to slewfoot him. That's exactly what I would've done. You wanna play like a bitch and cheap shot, be prepared for the same thing back you fvck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.