Boston is a beautiful city, but it is no Montreal. I've spent extensive time all over North America and Montreal is hard to compete with.
Our family, my uncle's family, and another aunt's family (both in/around Boston) have alternated years visiting each other ever since my youngest brother was old enough to take on such road trips (he's 29 now, if that tell you anything). And while there's plenty to see and do, and lots of "redeeming qualities" about Boston, I have to agree... it doesn't really hold a candle to Montreal (a place I've also visited/stayed in about a dozen times), imo.
Whatever though. We're talking about very much an "after thought" aspect when UFA hockey players are looking for a new contract, and very unlikely to be an element that override anything else in the decision-making process.
I think that has more to do with the schools in question than it does with the city of Boston compared to Montreal. People choose MIT because it's MIT not because it's in Boston.
Students, yes; faculty members factor in quality of life more than students, in addition to the school. They are likely to stay there a long time. The difference between Harvard and Johns Hopkins boils down to the difference between Boston and Baltimore to a significant extent, which often favors Boston.
In any event, all of this motivates lengthening the list of liveable cities to more than just 3.
Students, yes; faculty members factor in quality of life more than students, in addition to the school. They are likely to stay there a long time.
So let's pretend then for a second that Montreal is a much better place to live than Boston. Are you implying that a professor would rather teach at Mcgill than Harvard because of that? I don't think so. Heck, even though I feel Montreal is in another class of cities(no disrespect to beautiful Boston), I'd rather have Harvard on my resume, and my pay cheque.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCarolinaMtlExpat
The difference between Harvard and Johns Hopkins boils down to the difference between Boston and Baltimore to a significant extent, which often favors Boston.
Yes, but that's Baltimore, not Montreal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCarolinaMtlExpat
In any event, all of this motivates lengthening the list of liveable cities to more than just 3.
Please re-read my second paragraph. The point that I am making is that if MIT and Harvard are able to attract world-class academic talent, it is due in part to the attractiveness of the city. These people can literally go anywhere on the planet. Moreover, I would argue that Boston is very good at attracting academic, technical and clinical talent that can go anywhere on the planet and that is not native to the area, more so than Montreal. The players' kids are immaterial to this discussion.
The bolded part = fair enough even though one might argue that it's because MIT and Harvard are great schools that they attract good talent and not necessarily because Boston is a good city. Princeton is a great school too and it's in NJ, NJ is a complete ****hole. Princeton doesn't seem to have trouble attracting talented people either.
Okay going to requote you for the purposes of this post, it's getting annoying scrolling back and forth :
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCarolinaMtlExpat
Actually, my comment was not a reflection of McGill. I did my Bachelors' and Ph.D. there, and did my Master's at Ecole Polytechnique. They're both fine schools.
The implication actually was that these top schools manage to attract world-class talent, due in part to the attractiveness of the city. I could also have mentioned arguably the top teaching hospital in the world, Mass General Hospital, which also attracts top clinical talent, based on both its own merits and those of Boston itself.
Moreover, I have no beef with Montreal being on the list, but question a list on quality of life that includes it but specifically not Boston. Struck me as parochial.
This is what you tell me to re-read. I hardly think Boston is a bad city by the way, only ever heard good things about the city itself though I've never been. The point is though those schools attract people because they're great schools. Is it in part due to Boston being a nice city? Well I guess so, but Princeton doesn't seem to be having much trouble in that department, plenty of schools that are great in not so cities still attract tons of talented people. Plus what does any of this have to do with hockey, I guess you're trying to compare the Boston Bruins team (solid hockey team) to Harvard (solid school) both being in the same place. I get what you're saying and it's valid, just didn't realize what you were going on about originally I just don't think the nice city aspect has so much to do with it as great team does, though obviously it plays its part, there are plenty of nicer cities and I'm not even here to dispute Montreal vs Boston. Truth is there are only so many dollars each team can spend and only so many good teams and I think that goes a lot further than Boston the city does.
Now if we were talking about a place like LA that has a competitive team and very nice weather, can live on the beach and what not, I'd understand because that's a real draw. Bottom line Boston is a nice city but when people think of nice cities they don't think of Montreal/Boston, I'm sure most of them think of Vancouver, Victoria, various cities in California, New York City, etc.
I don't think so, maybe you have different standards.
OK hot stuff. I'm sure a player like yourself can comb through all the chicks in say Detroit, or Chicago, or Estonia, or wherever, and not find anyone worthy of him.
OK hot stuff. I'm sure a player like yourself can comb through all the chicks in say Detroit, or Chicago, or Estonia, or wherever, and not find anyone worthy of him.
OK hot stuff. I'm sure a player like yourself can comb through all the chicks in say Detroit, or Chicago, or Estonia, or wherever, and not find anyone worthy of him.
I've been to Detroit, and it's a ****hole... you might want to use different examples. Just proved my point.
Interesting, to say the least. I'm a bit skeptical of how they came up with that? Seems like some kind of american pride thing more than anything.
I think it's explained in the opening paragraph.
"we researched where Miss America, Miss USA, and the Playmate of the Year have hailed from since 1980. Beginning with a list of more than 60 cities, we narrowed the field to those with the most winners and then figured in the total female population of each. The result: The five municipalities with the most award-winning beauties per capita."
We've all seen the magazines... women in short shorts and bikini tops bent over cars covered in a little bit of grease holding a wrench? Plenty hot, haha.
1 - HE WAS don't forget it WAS ! For all the respects i have for Jagr and his career, it doens't change that the fact that no NHL teams are willing to sign he disturbing don't you think?
You're really thick, you know that? No NHL team was willing to pay him 5-7 MILLION per season, which he got elsewhere. That's a huge difference between this reality and your perception. Pretty sure a NHL team would've taken him at Selanne's pay, but Jagr wanted money at the time. Get it now? Probably not.
Again, you completely fail to bring VALID arguments. You use large examples without detail to say taking veterans = no cup, yet there hasn't been a veteran as talented as him to compare with... since Lemieux. There's absolutely no correlation at all. You'd be better off if I tried and made arguments for your POV, which I could and would probably be a lot more valid, but I still think the risk is worth it. It's a very small risk and very high reward type of situation.
Quote:
2 - In don't give a crap about how many khl teams. The thing is that unless KHL not even SEL are interested in Jagr.
And yet that was your argument, and yet two NHL teams are interested to date, and 4 KHL teams. Your argument was that only one KHL team was interested in him. Your argument is crap, and again, not valid, so you just shrug it off.
Quote:
3 - I gave exemple of ****ed big name in NYR.
Which is similar to Montreal how? Because we have Gomez? Didn't we get to the ECF with Gomez... hmmm, maybe it wasn't Gomez who was a problem in NY. Maybe its just the organizational philosophy of great players in a country club. No matter if the Habs add Jagr for one season, Habs aren't gonna turn into the Rags. Again, invalid argument.
Quote:
4 - Yep, another big name who failed (that's why he didn't re-sign)
Frolov isn't a big name. He had one 70 points season a few years ago playing with Cammy, and was offered a 3 mil one year contract by the Rags. WOW that surely is a big contract for a truly big name. The words I would have to use to describe your incompetence at forming a proper argumentation would have me in line for several infractions, but I think it's obvious to most people with a brain that the only thing you bring is a biased opinion. No true facts to properly correlate situations and no valid arguments to even state a case.
Quote:
5 - I linked Jagr with the fact that people want some Big Name, let's face it if Jagr wasn't named Jagr, nobody would like to bring a 39 years old veteran with 50 points in KHL.
Most people I know who want Jagr is not because it's some big name. It's rather because he's a good player that seems to have chemistry with Plex, and we do need a stopgap on our top 9 until Pac, Eller, DD and Pou (if ever) can grow a bit, and for a better UFA period where we can get a good younger player.
Stop your knee jerk reactions. Understand that your opinion is based on nothing else than your skewed perception of reality. This fact is glarring when looking at the kind of arguments you bring, and not just about this subject. It's like this with you in every friggin thread.
Quote:
6 - I'd rather make some room for guys like Palushaj or Engqvist.
You don't understand the need for depth which is primordial in today's NHL. Pal and Enqvist are RFAs who can be sent back and forth from the AHL without waivers. Unless they absolutely rock the camp, the intelligent and common move among NHL GMs would be to have them start the season off the lineup and in the AHL.
Good thing you aren't the GM.
Quote:
7 - I posted again
And again proved you are unable to bring constructive argumentation that at least holds some ground.
It's a great thing for you that they don't issue permits to type on a keyboard.
:
