HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Notices

Which team will you take? (Canadiens or Lightning)

View Poll Results: Which
Montreal Canadiens 246 72.35%
Montreal Lightning 94 27.65%
Voters: 340. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-21-2010, 01:16 PM
  #101
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 20,715
vCash: 500
Let's put it this way: if the current TB roster/organization wore the CH, played in the Bell Centre, and Stevie Y and Guy B had their offices there, too... I'd be way more excited for next season and beyond than I already am.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 01:58 PM
  #102
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turboflex View Post
Tampa's top 6 is fantastic but their bottom 6 and D are much weaker then the Habs.
It's a lot easier to fix a bottom-6 than any other part of a team. Yzerman has cap space; if he gets the green light from management, he can fix that problem.

That's without counting how much they might improve with a modern hockey style. Tocchet wasn't exactly a strategic maven.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 02:05 PM
  #103
centrehice
Registered User
 
centrehice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 922
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strik_IX View Post
History + 24 cups, what?

Close the poll before you humiliate yourself more.

Dunno if it's sad, but P could dress up youpi and stick him in ets and I<d still watch//buy tickets. This city bleeds red white and blue, not black and blue (ok... maybe one week end a year )

edit: you talking about rosters, or franchise at large?
What does history + 24 cups mean? I believe he's talking about switching current rosters. Our roster didn't win 24 cups. I realize he said Montreal Lightning, but the question is obviously asking which personnel you like better from top to bottom. History and cups has nothing to do with the current personnel on the habs, and the 2004 cup has very little to do with the current lightning.

I really like a few pieces of the lightning, and their management. Mainly Stevie Y, Guy, Stamkos, Marty, Vinny, and Hedman. I'd say they have more elite players, and Montreal has more depth.

centrehice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 02:07 PM
  #104
DDs not undersized
Former Partisan duCH
 
DDs not undersized's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Bangkok
Country: Thailand
Posts: 3,375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
Let's put it this way: if the current TB roster/organization wore the CH, played in the Bell Centre, and Stevie Y and Guy B had their offices there, too... I'd be way more excited for next season and beyond than I already am.
TRAITOR!!!!!!!!!!! GO JUMP IN TB'S BANDWAGON YOU &%$#@!!


















DDs not undersized is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 02:11 PM
  #105
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,607
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by centrehice View Post
What does history + 24 cups mean? I believe he's talking about switching current rosters. Our roster didn't win 24 cups. I realize he said Montreal Lightning, but the question is obviously asking which personnel you like better from top to bottom. History and cups has nothing to do with the current personnel on the habs, and the 2004 cup has very little to do with the current lightning.

I really like a few pieces of the lightning, and their management. Mainly Stevie Y, Guy, Stamkos, Marty, Vinny, and Hedman. I'd say they have more elite players, and Montreal has more depth.
But why the lightning? Why not trade with the Wings? or the Blackhawks? Why the lightening out of all teams? If you answer this question, then I'm pretty sure the purpose of the thread will become much clearer.

Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 02:13 PM
  #106
germanative
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by uiCk View Post
are you sure? you dont win cup with 3 players and hedman
You don't win the Cup with Gionta, Plekanec, Cammalleri and Markov

germanative is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 02:16 PM
  #107
uiCk
GrEmelins
 
uiCk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: MTL
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,198
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by germanative View Post
You don't win the Cup with Gionta, Plekanec, Cammalleri and Markov

woa. so... why are you following the habs? these players not going anywere.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Koseegin View Post
But why the lightning? Why not trade with the Wings? or the Blackhawks? Why the lightening out of all teams? If you answer this question, then I'm pretty sure the purpose of the thread will become much clearer.
dont have to look very far. That is ALL the media is talking about in montreal, is montreal tampa bay lightning.

uiCk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 02:29 PM
  #108
la25ecoupe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,453
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koseegin View Post
But why the lightning? Why not trade with the Wings? or the Blackhawks? Why the lightening out of all teams? If you answer this question, then I'm pretty sure the purpose of the thread will become much clearer.
Because Tampa has the player we wanted the most (Vinny , or 3 frenchies out of the TOP6), and has our staff (Boucher++, whom people saw as our future) and i guess people here would pick Y > PG?

We don't care about the rest of the teams

la25ecoupe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 02:31 PM
  #109
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,607
vCash: 500
Quote:
Because Tampa has the player we wanted the most (Vinny , or 3 frenchies out of the TOP6), and has our staff (Boucher++) and i guess people here would pick Y > PG?

Hmm, okay I get it.


Quote:
We don't care about the rest of the teams
I do.


Last edited by Andy: 07-21-2010 at 02:40 PM.
Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 02:34 PM
  #110
zzoo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: Vietnam
Posts: 2,016
vCash: 500
I see it this way...
I love Montreal, but if we could trade all our players for TB players, the I'd do it.

Would it be nice to see Stamkos, St-Louis, Gagné, Lecavalier, Hedman in Habs jersey ?

zzoo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 02:55 PM
  #111
Turboflex*
 
Turboflex*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,152
vCash: 500
this thread needs to be bumped next april

Turboflex* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 03:07 PM
  #112
germanative
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by uiCk View Post
woa. so... why are you following the habs? these players not going anywere.
I love these players and the Habs, that's not the question. But be serious, with St Louis-Lecavalier-Stamkos-Hedman, a team is more near to lift a Cup than Camm-Pleks-Gio-Markov on a team...

A bottom 6 is way more easy to build than a team core...

germanative is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 03:15 PM
  #113
Darth Joker
Registered User
 
Darth Joker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
Let's put it this way: if the current TB roster/organization wore the CH, played in the Bell Centre, and Stevie Y and Guy B had their offices there, too... I'd be way more excited for next season and beyond than I already am.
Good way of putting it. I agree.

Darth Joker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 03:18 PM
  #114
PunkinDrublic*
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Sutton,Qc-Sudbury,On
Posts: 8,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koseegin View Post
Hmm, okay I get it.




I do.
WE DON"T !

PunkinDrublic* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 03:20 PM
  #115
la25ecoupe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,453
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
Let's put it this way: if the current TB roster/organization wore the CH, played in the Bell Centre, and Stevie Y and Guy B had their offices there, too... I'd be way more excited for next season and beyond than I already am.
Bien dit, well put.

la25ecoupe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 03:20 PM
  #116
uiCk
GrEmelins
 
uiCk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: MTL
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,198
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by germanative View Post
I love these players and the Habs, that's not the question. But be serious, with St Louis-Lecavalier-Stamkos-Hedman, a team is more near to lift a Cup than Camm-Pleks-Gio-Markov on a team...

A bottom 6 is way more easy to build than a team core...
read your own quote, you just said you don't win cup with these players, not whos better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by germanative View Post
You don't win the Cup with Gionta, Plekanec, Cammalleri and Markov

uiCk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 03:21 PM
  #117
saints96
Registered User
 
saints96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,924
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by uiCk View Post
read your own quote, you just said you don't win cup with these players, not whos better.
why do these people cheer for the habs then? they're a waste!

They have openly admitted that they cheer for the name on the back not the crest in the front. You have media personel admitting that they would rather have francophone coaches than win the cup(retard Rejean tremblay said that this morning, and im sure others share is opinion) Its simple.. if you dont like how the orgaization is handling thing, GTFO, no one is asking you to be a fan. The whole Habs entourage and and fanbase would be a much better place without you phony, fake fans.


Last edited by saints96: 07-21-2010 at 03:29 PM.
saints96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 03:38 PM
  #118
Ozymandias
#firetherrien
 
Ozymandias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hockey Mecca
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,439
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
Let's put it this way: if the current TB roster/organization wore the CH, played in the Bell Centre, and Stevie Y and Guy B had their offices there, too... I'd be way more excited for next season and beyond than I already am.
Not me, in my case, the next few years of having Markov and Subban would get me way more excited.

And anyway, to me :

Elite players
TB > Mtl

Offensive players
TB > Mtl

Defensive forwards
TB < Mtl

Offensive Dmen
TB < Mtl

Defensive Dmen
TB < Mtl

Goalies
TB <= Mtl

Depth
TB < Mtl

Potential NHLers
TB < Mtl

Coaches

TB <= Mtl

Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
It's a lot easier to fix a bottom-6 than any other part of a team. Yzerman has cap space; if he gets the green light from management, he can fix that problem.

That's without counting how much they might improve with a modern hockey style. Tocchet wasn't exactly a strategic maven.
And neither is Boucher. He's a motivator. But also an inexperienced coach who never dealt with millionaire pros. I'm sure he'll do just fine, still, you can't expect him to turn things completely around by himself.

You make me laugh with your mentions of "modern hockey style" (because I know for sure that's a not-so subtle shot you took at Martin) while almost all efficient hockey systems have already been created a long time ago. It's all hybrid and recycled systems. I'm far from being a Martin fan, still, your obsession is becoming ridiculous. The fact of the matter is, even if it gives results, you dislike Martin's system, plain and simple. It doesn't mean you are right, and it doesn't mean your portrayal of his coaching is accurate either.

Ozymandias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 04:32 PM
  #119
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
And neither is Boucher. He's a motivator.
Tell that to everyone who's intrigued by his innovative 1-3-1 style (which isn't THAT innovative, but still) or by the excellence of all his team's power plays.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
But also an inexperienced coach who never dealt with millionaire pros. I'm sure he'll do just fine, still, you can't expect him to turn things completely around by himself.
He does have a degree in sports psychology, which I'm sure will help. In any case, while I think the world of Boucher, but he doesn't need to be very good to outdo Montreal's head coach.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
You make me laugh with your mentions of "modern hockey style" (because I know for sure that's a not-so subtle shot you took at Martin) while almost all efficient hockey systems have already been created a long time ago.
Modern hockey systems focus on puck possession and operate with the understanding that the best way to achieve defense is to keep the puck out of your own zone, preferably your own players' stick.

They may or may not have been created years ago, but I do know one thing: Montreal does not practice such a style. In fact the Habs do not practice a style of hockey that's likely to be successful in post-lockout hockey. With clutch-and-grab, spending one's life in the defensive zone might have been a viable strategy, but in 2010, it's suicide. Especially if your transition game consists of dumping the puck off the boards.

If the Habs don't shift to a more controlling style that involves spending more time outside of their own zone -- even if it is an actual trap that involves clogging the neutral zone and trying to create turnovers there, rather than always fall back to the goalie -- then they're not going to improve. That's a necessity. I could care less if Martin makes this change or some new coach does, but until it happens, the Habs will not improve.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
The fact of the matter is, even if it gives results, you dislike Martin's system, plain and simple. It doesn't mean you are right, and it doesn't mean your portrayal of his coaching is accurate either.
Okay, let's talk about the results. Martin led a salary-capped team to an 88-point season and a 24-33-25 regulation record. His style gave Montreal some of the worst underlying stats in the league. Hell, no need to get exotic with stats. The Habs allowed 32.1 shots per game, 5th worst in the league (besting only Edmonton, Anaheim, Atlanta and Florida) -- that's some effective defense right there. They took only 28.6 shots per game (6th worst, above Columbus, Florida, Edmonton, Colorado and Minnesota) -- making them one of the worst teams in the league both on offense and defense. This speaks to how routinely they were dominated by all comers.

They managed to acheive the lofty perch of 88 points via ungodly goaltending and a fair bit of overtime luck. That was good enough to make the playoffs in 8th place thanks to an exceptionally weak year in the East. Otherwise, they were a bad team, plain and simple. With merely "very good" goaltending, they'd have been a lottery team. Thankfully, Halak stood on his head. And in a normal year, even that wouldn't have been enough.

And for all the criticism levelled at the Habs' roster, I don't think it was the fifth-worst in the league, injuries and all.

That was depressing. I hadn't looked at this in a while and didn't remember that it was this bad. I don't think people quite understand, or really want to think about, exactly how poorly the Habs played all year. There were extenuating circumstances (injuries), but they can only explain so much.

To get back on topic: if Boucher has his roster playing a quality strategy, such as the one he had the Bulldogs playing, I think the Bolts are a better team than the Habs. I'm not convinced TB has actually better personnel throughout, but in practice you could make a decent case that the Habs are one of the five worst teams in the league in terms of quality of play. Crank it up to 10th worst because those are some pretty superficial stats and there's bound to be less injuries (right?), and I still think the Bolts can do better than that.


Last edited by MathMan: 07-21-2010 at 04:37 PM.
MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 04:45 PM
  #120
ECWHSWI
P.K. is perfect.
 
ECWHSWI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 14,082
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by germanative View Post
I love these players and the Habs, that's not the question. But be serious, with St Louis-Lecavalier-Stamkos-Hedman, a team is more near to lift a Cup than Camm-Pleks-Gio-Markov on a team...

A bottom 6 is way more easy to build than a team core...

with theses players they didnt even made the PO, while with the ones you listed we made it to the ECF...

so, this opinion is based on... ???

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 04:53 PM
  #121
ECWHSWI
P.K. is perfect.
 
ECWHSWI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 14,082
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Tell that to everyone who's intrigued by his innovative 1-3-1 style (which isn't THAT innovative, but still) or by the excellence of all his team's power plays.



He does have a degree in sports psychology, which I'm sure will help. In any case, while I think the world of Boucher, but he doesn't need to be very good to outdo Montreal's head coach.



Modern hockey systems focus on puck possession and operate with the understanding that the best way to achieve defense is to keep the puck out of your own zone, preferably your own players' stick.

They may or may not have been created years ago, but I do know one thing: Montreal does not practice such a style. In fact the Habs do not practice a style of hockey that's likely to be successful in post-lockout hockey. With clutch-and-grab, spending one's life in the defensive zone might have been a viable strategy, but in 2010, it's suicide. Especially if your transition game consists of dumping the puck off the boards.

If the Habs don't shift to a more controlling style that involves spending more time outside of their own zone -- even if it is an actual trap that involves clogging the neutral zone and trying to create turnovers there, rather than always fall back to the goalie -- then they're not going to improve. That's a necessity. I could care less if Martin makes this change or some new coach does, but until it happens, the Habs will not improve.



Okay, let's talk about the results. Martin led a salary-capped team to an 88-point season and a 24-33-25 regulation record. His style gave Montreal some of the worst underlying stats in the league. Hell, no need to get exotic with stats. The Habs allowed 32.1 shots per game, 5th worst in the league (besting only Edmonton, Anaheim, Atlanta and Florida) -- that's some effective defense right there. They took only 28.6 shots per game (6th worst, above Columbus, Florida, Edmonton, Colorado and Minnesota) -- making them one of the worst teams in the league both on offense and defense. This speaks to how routinely they were dominated by all comers.

They managed to acheive the lofty perch of 88 points via ungodly goaltending and a fair bit of overtime luck. That was good enough to make the playoffs in 8th place thanks to an exceptionally weak year in the East. Otherwise, they were a bad team, plain and simple. With merely "very good" goaltending, they'd have been a lottery team. Thankfully, Halak stood on his head. And in a normal year, even that wouldn't have been enough.

And for all the criticism levelled at the Habs' roster, I don't think it was the fifth-worst in the league, injuries and all.

That was depressing. I hadn't looked at this in a while and didn't remember that it was this bad. I don't think people quite understand, or really want to think about, exactly how poorly the Habs played all year. There were extenuating circumstances (injuries), but they can only explain so much.

To get back on topic: if Boucher has his roster playing a quality strategy, such as the one he had the Bulldogs playing, I think the Bolts are a better team than the Habs. I'm not convinced TB has actually better personnel throughout, but in practice you could make a decent case that the Habs are one of the five worst teams in the league in terms of quality of play. Crank it up to 10th worst because those are some pretty superficial stats and there's bound to be less injuries (right?), and I still think the Bolts can do better than that.
that's what modern hockey is about ?? having the puck more often than your opponent ?? really ???

wow, they sure didnt reinvent the wheel with this modern style you know...

I'm pretty sure great teams of the past didnt bother having the puck just once in a while...

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 06:07 PM
  #122
DetBigWangs
Registered User
 
DetBigWangs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strik_IX View Post
History + 24 cups, what?

Close the poll before you humiliate yourself more.

Dunno if it's sad, but P could dress up youpi and stick him in ets and I<d still watch//buy tickets. This city bleeds red white and blue, not black and blue (ok... maybe one week end a year )

edit: you talking about rosters, or franchise at large?
Most of those cups were won when dinosaurs walked the Earth and Chris Chelios was a young lad.

DetBigWangs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 06:56 PM
  #123
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
wow, they sure didnt reinvent the wheel with this modern style you know...
I said modern hockey is based on puck possession. I never claimed that puck possession wasn't important before.

But teams didn't focus on it to quite the same extent. There was a time where you could shut down a team effectively by focussing on defensive play without the puck rather than pursue puck possession. There was a period in the nineties where teams were more willing to sit back and let their opponents come to them rather than hang onto the puck to the extent the good teams do now, especially with a lead. It's often called the "Dead Puck Era", appropriately enough. It doesn't work so much now, as teams can't defend without the puck as well as they could in the era of clutch-and-grab. It's something you have to know how to do, because sometimes you won't have the puck, but not something you can rely on a systematic basis.

Yet the Habs insist on playing that way and they don't do it particularly well either (they have virtually no neutral zone defense). When I contrast "modern hockey" to the Habs' style, this is what I mean. I probably should write "post-lockout hockey" instead.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 07:03 PM
  #124
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 20,715
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
I said modern hockey is based on puck possession. I never claimed that puck possession wasn't important before.

But teams didn't focus on it to quite the same extent. There was a time where you could shut down a team effectively by focussing on defensive play without the puck rather than pursue puck possession. There was a period in the nineties where teams were more willing to sit back and let their opponents come to them rather than hang onto the puck to the extent the good teams do now, especially with a lead. It's often called the "Dead Puck Era", appropriately enough. It doesn't work so much now, as teams can't defend without the puck as well as they could in the era of clutch-and-grab. It's something you have to know how to do, because sometimes you won't have the puck, but not something you can rely on a systematic basis.

Yet the Habs insist on playing that way and they don't do it particularly well either (they have virtually no neutral zone defense). When I contrast "modern hockey" to the Habs' style, this is what I mean. I probably should write "post-lockout hockey" instead.
Without getting into the finer points of the arguments you're defending in this thread... I must say, having watched 100s of NHL games last season the Habs were certainly among the easiest teams to gain the blueline against. Perhaps even one of the easiest to maintain possession against in the offensive zone. Montreal's scramble defense and goaltending was awesome, however.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
And anyway, to me :

Elite players
TB > Mtl

Offensive players
TB > Mtl

Defensive forwards
TB < Mtl

Offensive Dmen
TB < Mtl

Defensive Dmen
TB < Mtl

Goalies
TB <= Mtl

Depth
TB < Mtl

Potential NHLers
TB < Mtl


Coaches

TB <= Mtl
Can't really argue with any of these "algebraic" expressions, but I am curious about one thing: when you rate Montreal's "potential NHLers" above TB's, is this a quantity, quality, or "balanced" assessment? I know HF ranks Montreal's prospect pool above TB's, but I think I'd give them all up for Connolly, Ashton, Panik, Mihalik, Tokarski, Tyrell, Wishart, Lashoff, Wright, and Beukeboom (many/most of whom I see in the NHL at LEAST semi-permanently as early as next year). If Stamkos, Hedman, and Downie weren't already permanent NHLers (20, 19, and 23 years old respectively), the "prospect" list wouldn't even be a contest in my eyes.

And since you included the coaches, I'll add:

GM
TB >= Montreal

Why, you ask? Obviously PG is more experienced in the management field. That is worth a lot. However, Yzerman basically went to the Harvard of GM schools in Detroit (I'll say PG got his degree at McGill, continuing with the analogy), and as GM of the Olympic gold winning Canadian team, and likely the next Olympic team as well, I would imagine he'll have little trouble convincing top Canadian talent (maybe other nationalities, too?) to come play for him (if/when TB targets UFAs to fill spots) over the next 4 years. I saw you mention that Boucher has never had to manage the egos/personalities of NHL millionaires/superstars before. You know who has? Yzerman. Recently, and successfully.


Last edited by Ohashi_Jouzu: 07-21-2010 at 07:29 PM.
Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2010, 07:07 PM
  #125
Crimson Skorpion
Global Moderator
 
Crimson Skorpion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lachine, Quebec
Country: Germany
Posts: 25,832
vCash: 50
Awards:
I could never like the Lightning. More personal then anything related to the team, as my dead-beat, poor excuse of a father loves that team. So every time I see that logo, his face is there.

Wow... that actually came off as pretty emo... Well, still the Habs because I have the CH tattooed on my heart.

Besides, if your a business man, then normally you`d want to be in the possession of the team that is constantly in the top 3 for money earned every year.

Crimson Skorpion is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:57 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.