I can't take it anymore

[Matteau#32]

You know the Rangers are owned by cablevision and the cablevision just handed the devils 500 million to keep them on the channel

[stevestevens]

I dont understand why you think the rangers are that superior to the devils. they have been around since the start and won 4 cups and the devils win 3 in 25. The devils have been much more successful in past years and the rangers were only 2 points or 1 game ahead when the teams played an even amount of games where the rangers played 13 home and 12 away while the devils played 9 home and 16 away. Im not saying that one team is better then the other but im just saying i dont understand where youre coming from by calling the devils the red headed stepchild when the team across the river hasnt brought a banner up besides retiring numbers in 13-14 years

[Matteau#32]

Not saying the Rangers have been more succesful over the past 15 years. However, they could win every cup for the next 20 years and they'll still play 2nd fiddle to the Rangers in this town. THAT is what makes them the red-headed stepchild. Broadcasting on a network owned by the Rangers only intensifies that. The point of this thread was these people were sick of Rosen and Michelleti and it escalated into they are sick of the rangers.

However, now, the Rangers are better. They are ahead in the standings, they have won all 3 games and they are doing it without their big guns producing the way they were expected. If Jagr and co start to turn it on, they'll leave the Devils in the dust.

Edited December 2, 2007 by Matteau#32

[LizDevil30]

Not saying the Rangers have been more succesful over the past 15 years. However, they could win every cup for the next 20 years and they'll still play 2nd fiddle to the Rangers in this town. THAT is what makes them the red-headed stepchild. Broadcasting on a network owned by the Rangers only intensifies that. The point of this thread was these people were sick of Rosen and Michelleti and it escalated into they are sick of the rangers.

However, now, the Rangers are better. They are ahead in the standings, they have won all 3 games and they are doing it without their big guns producing the way they were expected. If Jagr and co start to turn it on, they'll leave the Devils in the dust.

[squishyx]

skeeter, you do realize the same people who own the Rangers are the same people who own the station the devils are shown? What do you expect? Is there a conflict of interest? Of course. If Vanderbeek was this great owner who really wanted to try and get the devils their own niche in this market, he should start his own network and put the Devils on, similar to what Steinbrenner and Wilpon did with their clubs. Or, get out of the contract with FSNY, and get on YES or SNY. Wait, then Dolan will buy up advertising time on Yes and SNY during devils games and you'll cry about that and I will sit here and laugh at you some more.

As for commercials during Rangers games, couldnt tell you what they show. I always switch over to another game for a the minute or two. You should try it if it bothers you this much.

Liz, Dano puts up with Cangelosi because he is an old drunk who likes his paycheck and if he didnt have this he'd be sitting at home bored out of his mind. $h!t, if the Dolans really wanted to piss you off I guess they could fire Daneyko and put someone like Graves in there as the analyst.

As the red-headed stepchild you should be happy you at least get to eat at the table and don't have to wait for the scraps in your dig dish.

[Triumph]

Not saying the Rangers have been more succesful over the past 15 years. However, they could win every cup for the next 20 years and they'll still play 2nd fiddle to the Rangers in this town. THAT is what makes them the red-headed stepchild. Broadcasting on a network owned by the Rangers only intensifies that. The point of this thread was these people were sick of Rosen and Michelleti and it escalated into they are sick of the rangers.

However, now, the Rangers are better. They are ahead in the standings, they have won all 3 games and they are doing it without their big guns producing the way they were expected. If Jagr and co start to turn it on, they'll leave the Devils in the dust.

[Matteau#32]

If Jagr turned it on they'd leave the Devils in the dust? What about '06? Jagr was on fire, the rags needed what 1 win to clinch the division and couldn't do it? Did you forget about the streak? I'm sure you did, too painful a memory and it's not like you are constantly reminded of it like the Devils fans are of '94.

[Matteau#32]

Too bad Jagr's best days are behind him - enjoy throwing him out there 21 minutes a game and watching him score 30 goals if the Rangers are lucky. Don't forget the bad offensive zone penalties he constantly takes, that Rosen and Michelletti rarely call out as the awful penalties they are.

Oh and that Scott Gomez - what can't he do?

[stevestevens]

Someone is feisty tonight

[skeeter]

Uh, yeah, they do let us know about his bad lazy penalties. Fortunately they are down this year. He has 10 penalties in 26 games.

Gomez he has 19 points in 26 games. That would put him 3rd on your team. I know, the devils do not need him.

[Devils731]

Devils arent as good this year as 06, Brodeur is not as good, Lundqvist is better than he was in 06 as is the Rangers team D.

[Weekes Head]

Gomez he has 19 points in 26 games. That would put him 3rd on your team. I know, the devils do not need him.

[Satans Hockey]

They didn't complain about it being a penalty. Just thought it was good that Prucha did that, I agree. Ottawa has had a tendency to take runs at Prucha, but I guess you were in the bathroom when they showed those highlights.

I don't think Sam and Michelleti are homers, but Sam seems to be too much of a Bettman guy, seems to agree with every penalty called. Most ranger fans I know think Sam is too quick to praise the opponents. Just admit you can't handle the Rangers being better and you can't handle the Rangers have young players worth getting excited over. You and triumph for that matter.

[ice dog]

i take Michelletti and Rosen with a grain of salt when catching the odd ranger game...it's par for the course, the full "ranger experience".

as a devils fan it is natural to vommit a little in your mouth every time you hear 2 grown men start acting like silly school girls, fighting over who's going to date sean avery.

[Sickman]

It doesn't say much about the other siblings when the redheaded stepchild is the only one in the house getting any a$$

And as far as the "Rangers experience" is concerned, the only thing that could be as equally torturing is probably castration by way of a rusty butter knife, especially now since the Rags are playing that boring, responsible pressure defense system.

True blue baby!

Edited December 2, 2007 by SickMan

[DevilMinder]

Cool the name calling guys and gals.

[SueNJ97]

Here's why this particular situation bothers me. I've had the discussion over with people on Hockeyrodent.com (Ranger site) about Prucha getting hit. Most of the time he is hit legally (there have times when he has been hit late, or sometimes there have been elbows thrown at him, and these should be called). However, the complaints are often that he is target, legally, because of his size (he is listed at 6 feet but he is very light at only 176 which is the same as Gionta weighs and, as we know, Brian's listed height of 5'7" is a joke). So, the problem is really that Prucha and the Rangers want to discourage other teams from hitting him legally, because his body is going to wear down, or, they are wafraid he is going to get hurt. And, apparently, (and I saw this on hockeyrodent.com, as well as the comment from Sam and Joe), they think the way to discourage it is for Prucha to put the elbow up. OK, so, does that also apply to other players who are smaller size, or who are about Prucha's height and, like him, carry less weight? Are you not supposed to hit them legally and are they now supposed to be commended for putting an elbow in your face?

The reason they don't allow hitting in women's hockey is that they are afraid the bigger women (mostly the US and Canadian women) will hurt the mostly smaller from the other countries. Players like Lindros (in his younger days) used to get penalties for hitting smaller players too hard on what where perfectly legal hits. All of this just perplexes me. But it's all in the spirit of what Sam and Joe were talking about, and the attitude surrounding "protecting" Prucha by having him commit a penalty.

I understand the point of trying to stop the hits on players in a vulnerable position. Have we now decided that there is protected class of players who, because they are too small, should be commended for commiting a penalty on a legal hit? Should we come up with a list of players who should be praised for this? Should I now expect to hear Sam and Joe praise, say Zach Parise when he does the very same thing to a Ranger who hits him legally, or should I expect the vilification to follow...especially if it happens to be an elbow that knocks the Ranger out. Also, should I expect Ranger fans to believe that it was a smart play - or that Zach is an evil villain who just couldn't take a legal hit?

Personally, I think you should take the (legal) hit. But, hey, that's me.

[Matteau#32]

Well said, sue, as usual. Guys like Messier and Potvin were dirty as hell, lifting elbows and sticks to protect themselves. They are given a pass my most as they are hall-of-famers which Prucha is not. Bobby Clarke was one of the dirtiest cheapest SOB's to ever play professional sports, but noone dared retaliated, knowing his teammates would take off their heads. Well, that was til Clark Gillies beat the $h!t out of him. I'm sure some of you have heard about the little love-tap he gave to Kharlamov's ankles in game 5 or 6 of the 72 Summit Series. Kharlamov was very ineffective after the tap, a big reason why the Canadians came back to win.

The funny thing is, the hit being discussed is not even the hit he was called the penalty for. IIRC, this particular hit was in the 1st period, he got called for a high stick in the 3rd.

Edited December 3, 2007 by Matteau#32

[stevestevens]

The play was illegal in and a game where they were up 3-0 (i think maybe 4-1 at the point? not sure) Its not a horrible penalty to take by Prucha. Prucha and Brylin seem to be the 2 guys who get a hit on them ever game but never really get back so its not a horrible penalty by Prucha.

[Triumph]

Here's a fun game when watching a Rangers' broadcast:

See how many times Sam Rosen says 'good'.

Even more fun is to see how many times he applies it to a Rangers' play as opposed to the other team's.

Edited December 4, 2007 by Triumph

[The 29th Pick]

These two are just horrible - I can't watch any more Rangers games. If they're not falling over themselves to praise rookies for making completely standard plays, they're exhibiting blatant homerism over penalty calls or gushing over some other basic NHL play. I can't tell if this is part of the Dolan sycophantic regime or whether Sam Rosen has just gotten dumber over the years - but it's unlistenable as a fan of another team.

Today was the final straw - when Petr Prucha elbowed Chris Neil as a reaction to Neil's incoming hit, Michelleti says 'That's a good, smart play'. It's also a penalty, you dope.

[skeeter]

Those 2 are pure NY propaganda, I never have the sound on when I watch a Ranger game, esp. at the garden, I'll watch but can't listen, no way no how !!

[devilsfan26]

Give me a break. Go over to the cafe, my rangers board of choice and try to find me a thread about the Devils. The only time they are discussed is when they are playing the Rangers. Now compare that to how often the Rangers are discussed here. It's not even close. The only time I even post about the Rangers in here is when there is already an existing thread.

[DaneykoIsGod]

Wow ... this thread went from criticism of the Rangers broadcasters, to a good old fashioned Devils-Rangers bash fest, then back to broadcast criticism. That's a pretty impressive about-face.

For my money, the absolute WORST are the Flyers broadcasters. The only thing worse than hearing every call that goes against the Flyers being disputed? Hearing it in Jim Jackson's nasal voice. These guys even disagree with every freakin offsides call. During a game last season, Jackson and that dolt Steve Coates disagreed with a penalty call so vehemently that Coatsey even pulled out the rule book during intermission and read the rule word for word. Get over it and move on, guys. And speaking of Coates, the guy might as well be wearing a wig and red nose. Thank God Dornhoffer isn't in that booth anymore. He was about as useless as t!ts on a nun.

[hattrick]

For my money, the absolute WORST are the Flyers broadcasters. The only thing worse than hearing every call that goes against the Flyers being disputed? Hearing it in Jim Jackson's nasal voice. These guys even disagree with every freakin offsides call. During a game last season, Jackson and that dolt Steve Coates disagreed with a penalty call so vehemently that Coatsey even pulled out the rule book during intermission and read the rule word for word. Get over it and move on, guys. And speaking of Coates, the guy might as well be wearing a wig and red nose. Thank God Dornhoffer isn't in that booth anymore. He was about as useless as t!ts on a nun.