Because I usually have a cold, dead soul, and I like to feel things.
I equate it to having an abusive spouse and willingly asking for a second round of blows, I don't know why I do it, I just do, I will say one thing however, 1994 was far less bittersweet than 2011, at least in 94 they looked like they wanted to win game 7.
I equate it to having an abusive spouse and willingly asking for a second round of blows, I don't know why I do it, I just do, I will say one thing however, 1994 was far less bittersweet than 2011, at least in 94 they looked like they wanted to win game 7.
Rihanna and Chris Brown?
__________________
I told ya so. I was right all along!
I sat through for an hour+ of highlights from that SCF and I think I have come to the conclusion that we can't use injuries as an excuse to not win the Cup that year.
Yes, we had several injuries to our key players (Kesler, Henrik, Hamhuis), but the fact of the matter is, the Canucks STILL generated a ton of offense that series.
We had shot totals of: 34, 33, 41, 38, 25, 38, and 37. That is an average of 35 shots which is really good considering we didn't have any long OT games that series.
I know shot totals don't always matter because you have to look at the quality of shots you're taking. But from the highlights I watched (and from my own live memory), it seemed as if the Canucks were throwing everything on net and getting some amazing opportunities to score including a number of breakaways and odd man rushes. But we just could not bury ANYTHING.
Thomas played (in my opinion) the best a goaltender can play. He was just downright dominant and I think his performance is the best ever for any goaltender in any series.
There were so many times where all we needed was that first goal and the entire result of the game would be different.
Fact: In the 8-1 shelling by the Bruins in Game 3, the game was tied 0-0 after the first period! The B's scored 8 goals in two periods, 3 of which came in the final couple of minutes of the game!
If we had got a goal at the end of the first period, do you think we still lose 8-1? I don't think so.
To sum it up, Thomas was playing out of his mind and he is the primary reason why we lost. We can't keep coming up with the injury excuse. We got outplayed by one player, but that one player just so happened to define his Hall of Fame status in that 7 game series.
I sat through for an hour+ of highlights from that SCF and I think I have come to the conclusion that we can't use injuries as an excuse to not win the Cup that year.
Yes, we had several injuries to our key players (Kesler, Henrik, Hamhuis), but the fact of the matter is, the Canucks STILL generated a ton of offense that series.
We had shot totals of: 34, 33, 41, 38, 25, 38, and 37. That is an average of 35 shots which is really good considering we didn't have any long OT games that series.
I know shot totals don't always matter because you have to look at the quality of shots you're taking. But from the highlights I watched (and from my own live memory), it seemed as if the Canucks were throwing everything on net and getting some amazing opportunities to score including a number of breakaways and odd man rushes. But we just could not bury ANYTHING.
Thomas played (in my opinion) the best a goaltender can play. He was just downright dominant and I think his performance is the best ever for any goaltender in any series.
There were so many times where all we needed was that first goal and the entire result of the game would be different.
Fact: In the 8-1 shelling by the Bruins in Game 3, the game was tied 0-0 after the first period! The B's scored 8 goals in two periods, 3 of which came in the final couple of minutes of the game!
If we had got a goal at the end of the first period, do you think we still lose 8-1? I don't think so.
To sum it up, Thomas was playing out of his mind and he is the primary reason why we lost. We can't keep coming up with the injury excuse. We got outplayed by one player, but that one player just so happened to define his Hall of Fame status in that 7 game series.
And to think how beatable Thomas looked coming out of the Tampa series...
I equate it to having an abusive spouse and willingly asking for a second round of blows, I don't know why I do it, I just do, I will say one thing however, 1994 was far less bittersweet than 2011, at least in 94 they looked like they wanted to win game 7.
It makes a ton of sense, if that's what you're arguing against. I equate it to feeling attached to and supportive to a friend even when they become difficult to get along with. I personally feel bad for someone who walks out on everything that doesn't make them feel positive 100% of the time. Otherwise it means that you don't actually care and aren't attached to the team itself or caring about the outcome, in which case, why not do something else more worthwhile with your time rather than watch hockey?
Why would anyone want to follow competitive sports if they aren't accepting and appreciative of both the peaks and pitfalls?
You can bet that the fans who take the bitter defeats personally (I'm becoming less and less of one, personally) and let it get to them are equally going to get more out of victory (and more out of the sport, period, obviously) than the average fan as well.
That's always sort of been my own personal take on the term "bandwagoning"
Last edited by Shareefruck: 12-02-2012 at 12:05 AM.
It was the best of times, it was the worst of times. It was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness. It was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of individuality. It was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair.
We had everything before us, we had nothing before us. We were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way!
They're replaying Game 6 on the NHL Network in the US...Pretty depressing game. Even worse than the Canucks, and the refs were the duo of McGuire and Olczyk. Those guys are an embarrassment to broadcasting, zero respect for either of em.
They're replaying Game 6 on the NHL Network in the US...Pretty depressing game. Even worse than the Canucks, and the refs were the duo of McGuire and Olczyk. Those guys are an embarrassment to broadcasting, zero respect for either of em.
Only if Boston had Luongo in goal it would be Kesler and Daniel instead of Marchand and Ryder.
Nah, if Boston had Luongo in goal then he'd be hands down the number 1 goalie in people's rankings. People wouldn't be calling him a choke as he would have been the goalie to only allow 8 goals in 7 games. Although, I think people still might question Luongo for giving up untimely goals in games 1 and 5 costing the Bruins those games. In fact, Boston didn't have to win 2 1-0 games, so people would say he got outplayed by the other goalie who did.
Remembering the SCF is like purposely poking yourself in the eye. No idea why you people decide to do it. The only thing I'd like to remember forever is game 7 against Chicago.
Remembering the SCF is like purposely poking yourself in the eye. No idea why you people decide to do it. The only thing I'd like to remember forever is game 7 against Chicago.
I remember all days up until June 12, 2011 except for when I'm boozing. On those days, I remember up until today. Fuuuuuuuuuuuck. END LOCKOUT. END
