View Single Post
12-29-2012, 05:45 PM
Registered User
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 29,611
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Sentinel View Post
First of all, soccer that is so maligned around these parts is much more popular and much more lucrative, with all its diving and acting. NHL would kill to have a fraction of UEFA's revenues.
Nice strawman, lol. Why compare to a different sport all together, when the comparison is actually concerned with the relative style/appeal of the various stages of a specific sport's growth/history?

Originally Posted by Sentinel View Post
Second, some of the best hockey ever played was the 87 Canada Cup, all three games being 6-5. Guess what, even a typical All Star Game is more exciting than a Minnesota-Columbus regular season game, with all its "passion," "heart" and "survival." I want to see skill, not violence.
Pffft. I'm just gonna drop this here as one example among, well, a LOT more, showing how much physicality and "chippiness" was involved along the journey to that Canada Cup gold:

But for what it's worth, I agree with you. That kind of hockey was my favourite.

Originally Posted by Sentinel View Post
As for survival: Bobby Orr is frequently called the best defenseman of all time, and he did not survive for long. Which is a shame to me, but your good ol' Canadian approach probably says "too bad."
Wait a second, where are the "what ifs" with Bobby Orr? How much higher he could have gotten? Eight straight Norris trophies... two Cups... Not exactly as relevant a comparison as you thought, but it certainly does suggest that players like himself and Forsberg, maybe even Bure also had to pay the price for their style of play - eventually.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote