View Single Post
Old
09-29-2013, 07:46 AM
  #114
TheSniper26
No cure for being...
 
TheSniper26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Youngstown
Country: United States
Posts: 2,157
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KIRK View Post
Did you actually read what I wrote? The part that I marked in bold from your post actually is my position. My comment about losing four years in a row in the cup finals was a direct reply to sniper26's saying 'it's cup or bust, so people would see no difference between four cup losses in a row and what the Pens have done the last four playoffs'. I called BS on that, and I think rightfully so.

People here are getting too caught up in word games. And, frankly, it's become an excuse to ignore the proverbial elephant in the room. So, I'll repeat myself: It's June 2009. The Pens have just won a cup. Now, I'm a psychic, so I'm going to tell you about the next four years. They'll win a grand total of 3 playoff series. They'll beat a Sens squad that had missed the playoff the year before and was swept by the Pens the year before that in 6 games the year after winning the cup. In 2013, they'll beat an Isles team that hadn't sniffed the playoffs for years and an injury depleted Sens team before getting swept in their one ECF appearance in the four years after winning the cup.

Go back to June 2009. Sid is 21. Geno is 22. And, what I've told you is coming is in fact all they'll have to show for the four years that would come. Would you have cared then about excuses?

This has become comical. Arguments if a word choice is right. Someone else basically saying 'well, it's cup or bust, so who cares what happened since you didn't win'. Others saying, 'well, only Chicago and Boston have more to show for the last four years'.

Honestly, at some point, the excuses become a crutch. A year with a bad break, maybe even two out of four? I get it. But, name one year where you can say 'the Pens laid it all out there but just came up short'. Name one year where the word 'underachievement' wouldn't apply to what the Pens did in the playoffs.

Again, I'm not talking about a bad break or expecting the Pens to win every series. But, in June 2009, if you'd have asked me what can we reasonably expect from the Pens in the next four postseasons, I'm pretty sure that my answer would've been 'not this ****'.
Where did I say "who cares what happens since you didn't win"? Your exact words in one of your posts were:
"When you win a cup and have so much young elite talent, the standard becomes cup or bust"

Ok, that's fine. Then you turn around and say "if the Pens had lost every year in the finals (or even had a finals loss and an ECF loss to show for the last four years), then I think a lot of people, starting with me, would feel a lot less disgusted with the last four years."

I mean these are your exact words in consecutive posts. What am I meant to take from that? You seem to think that this fan base is far more rational and much easier to please than I do. If the Pens had strong showings in the playoffs every year, but always ultimately came up short, I think we'd still be seeing most of the same complaints we're seeing right now. I don't think for one second that we'd be sitting here distinguishing between bad losses and acceptable losses. Everybody would still be just as frustrated at the lack of cups since 09. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, people were complaining when we winning in the first two rounds this past year. It's tough to imagine a scenario where any kind of loss would have been accepted. The fact that people are looking back and calling 2011 an embarrassment kind of reinforces this belief. If there was ever a loss you could accept, it's that one. That doesn't appear to be the case though.

TheSniper26 is offline   Reply With Quote