View Single Post
Old
03-23-2013, 01:15 PM
  #112
blogofmike
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 806
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthStar4Canes View Post
I didn't answer the question to "sell" my opinion. I aswered the question with my opinion, and defended my reasoning behind my opinion due to the implication by some that "consecutive wins" as a deciding factor epitomized the "Stupid" in K.I.S.S. Or in all your reading/cutting/pasting did you miss that?

Those same people...you know, the smartypants pseudo-intelligensia of hockey....are now going to re-discuss one of the most-discussed and debated questions in modern hockey, thinking that nobody else has ever had the benefit of their insight, and therefore heard anything similar.

Some of us, however, have already heard everything they..or you... could conceivably say too many times to count during and immediately after those dynastic years by both Isle and Oil fanboys as well as the more-reasoned hockey world, and therefore LONG ago came up with some reasonable criteria in order to answer the question. What's ludicrous is that you would think "consecutive cups" is a ludicrous decider in this seemingly unanswerable question when all you're suggesting is that everyone start from zero and re-hash this stale debate as if it were fresh. Some of us put it to bed, and really don't care who's feelings get hurt because we never had a dog in either hunt.
Which is good for you. I`m of the opinion that Muhammad Ali was a greater fighter than Rocky Marciano. So is most of the world who has ever heard of them.

Marciano went 49-0 and retired as undisputed World Heavyweight Champion. Ali was 56-5. Ali is almost always ranked ahead of Rocky AINEC. The difference is `what`s behind the wins.`

This one is closer than Ali-Marciano, but it is still worth looking into silly little things like quality of opposition when determining what dynasty is greater.

blogofmike is offline   Reply With Quote