HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Why We All Need To Thank Alan Eagleson

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-01-2007, 11:15 PM
  #1
Joe Pelletier
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 70
vCash: 500
Why We All Need To Thank Alan Eagleson

I picked up Bob McCown's new book, and I got to tell you that this book is sure to stir up some controversy. It's called McCown's Law: 100 Greatest Hockey Arguments.

For example, forget about all the bad things he did and all the money he stole and all the people he screwed over. We all need to personally send Alan Eagleson a thank you card for all of the good things he did for hockey.

McCown's book where he also argues that Mark Messier's leadership skills are overrated, that Slovakia might be a better hockey nation than Canada, that we need bigger nets and that women's hockey shouldn't be an Olympic sport.

I have a full review available, including more on the Eagleson argument, at

http://www.hockeybookreviews.com/200...cowns-law.html

What do you think? Taking out all of the bad things Eagleson did, should his good contributions be better recognized?

Joe Pelletier
------------------
http://www.1972summitseries.com
http://www.greatesthockeylegends.com
http://www.hockeybookreviews.com

Joe Pelletier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-02-2007, 12:54 AM
  #2
GNick42
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,427
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Pelletier View Post
I picked up Bob McCown's new book, and I got to tell you that this book is sure to stir up some controversy. It's called McCown's Law: 100 Greatest Hockey Arguments.

For example, forget about all the bad things he did and all the money he stole and all the people he screwed over. We all need to personally send Alan Eagleson a thank you card for all of the good things he did for hockey.

McCown's book where he also argues that Mark Messier's leadership skills are overrated, that Slovakia might be a better hockey nation than Canada, that we need bigger nets and that women's hockey shouldn't be an Olympic sport.

I have a full review available, including more on the Eagleson argument, at

http://www.hockeybookreviews.com/200...cowns-law.html

What do you think? Taking out all of the bad things Eagleson did, should his good contributions be better recognized?

Joe Pelletier
------------------
http://www.1972summitseries.com
http://www.greatesthockeylegends.com
http://www.hockeybookreviews.com
Sure Eagleson did some good things for hockey but he was a crook. Then again, what lawyer isn't? Eagleson was a smart hockey man that is for sure. But he chose to use it to take the wrong path at times.

GNick42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-02-2007, 04:07 AM
  #3
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,844
vCash: 500
Interesting article, next time I'm in a bookstore, I'll check that out. I agree that Eagleson's faults have overshadowed all he accomplished, but, I kind of think, Good, I don't want to have sympathy for the devil...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Pelletier View Post
McCown's book where he also argues that Mark Messier's leadership skills are overrated, that Slovakia might be a better hockey nation than Canada, that we need bigger nets and that women's hockey shouldn't be an Olympic sport.
Just my own personal thoughts on those four:

-As a diehard Canucks fan, I believe that not only is Messier an overrated leader, he's a cancer. The type of guy who is either the man that everyone defers to or a constant disturbance.
-I don't think a country can be a better sports nation than hockey. We aren't wild like Brazilian football fans, but, that's just not a Canadian way to act. But we support the sport on a deep and meaningful level. That said, I'd have no problem saying that places like Slovakia as well as Finland, Czech Republic and other nations are excellent hockey nations who could be Canada's equal.
-Strongly disagree with wider nets. More goals don't make a better game.
-And yeah, when Woman's hockey is Canada and US fighting for 1st and Sweden and Finland for 3rd, and no one else competing, it isn't ready for the Olympics. But, there should be some sort of Women's World Cup to highlight the accomplishments of these women.

__________________
Every post comes with the Nalyd Psycho Seal of Approval.
Nalyd Psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-02-2007, 06:14 AM
  #4
boredmale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,651
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Pelletier View Post
that women's hockey shouldn't be an Olympic sport.
have to agree on this one, i hate how they shove it down our throats. A perfect example was when they were announcing the CAN Olympic team, they did both male and female teams at same time, why they felt the need to do both teams at the same time when most people could care less about the woman's team was beyond me.

boredmale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-02-2007, 09:13 AM
  #5
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,446
vCash: 500
Women's hockey SHOULD be a sport in the Olympics. While 2 countries dominate and only 4 or 5 or 6 countries really field a legit team there are a ton of women that play hockey in the world. Alot more women play hockey then anyone throws a javelin or a discus or competes in all the decathalon events or than do a biathalon or whatever.

Girls play hockey, they play pick-up hockey, they play road hockey, they play roller hockey. They do this for fun and not to train for the Olympics and they don't just do it in Canada. There is no legitimate argument that women's hockey should not be an Olympic sport.

Alan Eagleson so besmerched his name that what good he did will forever be overshadowed by the bad. The guy was a criminal. He defrauded his clients. He wasn't careless or incompetent or misguided..... he was a crook. He cost his CLIENTS millions and millions of dollars and years and years of higher pay. It is like OJ. Who remebers him as one of the best running backs in history today? The guy is a murderer and Eagleson is a crook.

Mark Messier was a good leader on the Rangers Cup teams... I agree though that he was over-rated. Funny how Gretzky is never really talked about as a "Leader". Yet he was the leader on every single team he ever played on.... including ever international team and the Oilers that included Mark Messier. Messier got the rep for being a leader and he likely was a leader but it is so far overblown as to be ridiculous.

Sens Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-02-2007, 09:35 AM
  #6
Zine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 8,845
vCash: 500
I actually agree with him about Messier.

Messier was a fantastic leader….but only when put in the right setting (i.e. his setting). Great leaders are able to lead in any and all situations.

IMO, guys like Yzerman, Sakic, etc. are/were much better captains than Messier.

Zine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-02-2007, 04:22 PM
  #7
pappyline
Registered User
 
pappyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mass/formerly Ont
Country: United States
Posts: 4,161
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Pelletier View Post
I picked up Bob McCown's new book, and I got to tell you that this book is sure to stir up some controversy. It's called McCown's Law: 100 Greatest Hockey Arguments.

For example, forget about all the bad things he did and all the money he stole and all the people he screwed over. We all need to personally send Alan Eagleson a thank you card for all of the good things he did for hockey.

McCown's book where he also argues that Mark Messier's leadership skills are overrated, that Slovakia might be a better hockey nation than Canada, that we need bigger nets and that women's hockey shouldn't be an Olympic sport.

I have a full review available, including more on the Eagleson argument, at

http://www.hockeybookreviews.com/200...cowns-law.html

What do you think? Taking out all of the bad things Eagleson did, should his good contributions be better recognized?

Joe Pelletier
------------------
http://www.1972summitseries.com
http://www.greatesthockeylegends.com
http://www.hockeybookreviews.com
I absolutely disagree with the take on Eagleson. I think all the so called good things he did were inevitable anyway. International hockey etc was going to happen. Eagleson maybe sped things up but later would have been better if it had been organized by someone with an ounze of integrity. He tied himself to the Bobby Orr bandwagon to get into a position of power. then he went ahead and screwed Orr along with everyone else. Turkey smiling AL was only out for himself and any "common good" that came out of it was purely accidental.

pappyline is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-02-2007, 06:13 PM
  #8
SilverSeven
Registered User
 
SilverSeven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
I actually agree with him about Messier.

Messier was a fantastic leader….but only when put in the right setting (i.e. his setting). Great leaders are able to lead in any and all situations.

IMO, guys like Yzerman, Sakic, etc. are/were much better captains than Messier.
How on earth can you complain that Messier is only good in one setting...and then compare him to two players who were only ever in one setting?

SilverSeven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-02-2007, 06:57 PM
  #9
mrhockey193195
Registered User
 
mrhockey193195's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 3,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverSeven View Post
How on earth can you complain that Messier is only good in one setting...and then compare him to two players who were only ever in one setting?
Lol, exactly my thoughts.

Put Yzerman on some of those disfunctional Ranger teams, and despite his greatness, I highly doubt he'd get them further than Messier did. No matter how good of a leader you are, sometimes you just can't do it on your own.

Regarding the woman's hockey as an olympic event, I absolutely believe it should be an olympic sport. Many of the games are extremely competative and exciting. While I acknowledge that only a few countries are in competition (i.e. Canada, US, Sweden, etc.), it still deserves to be in the olympic games. If nothing else, it will expose many young girls to the sport all around the world, and might further popularize it to females. There's no reason women shouldn't play hockey too.

mrhockey193195 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-02-2007, 07:39 PM
  #10
kihei
Registered User
 
kihei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,474
vCash: 1000
in the end, Eagleson is a scum-bag. No reason for even the most modest of genuflections.

kihei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-02-2007, 08:46 PM
  #11
boredmale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,651
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cup 2008 Sens Rule View Post
Women's hockey SHOULD be a sport in the Olympics. While 2 countries dominate and only 4 or 5 or 6 countries really field a legit team there are a ton of women that play hockey in the world. Alot more women play hockey then anyone throws a javelin or a discus or competes in all the decathalon events or than do a biathalon or whatever.
Let me change my statement a bit, I have no issue that Woman's hockey is part of the Olympics BUT it should be given the same level of airtime as javelin or discus throwing.

boredmale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-02-2007, 08:53 PM
  #12
SilverSeven
Registered User
 
SilverSeven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,431
vCash: 500
Mens hockey was FAR FAR FAR FAR FAR FAR more onesided when it was first in the olympics.

The competitive issue is a moot point.

SilverSeven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-02-2007, 11:53 PM
  #13
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by boredmale View Post
Let me change my statement a bit, I have no issue that Woman's hockey is part of the Olympics BUT it should be given the same level of airtime as javelin or discus throwing.
Why? I like Women's hockey... so do millions of Canadians. What were the ratings for Olympic women's hockey in Canada? I don't know what they are but I'd bet they were higher than most of the rest of the Olympic events.

Sens Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2007, 07:01 AM
  #14
HughJass*
 
HughJass*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: High Point, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 5,677
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to HughJass* Send a message via Yahoo to HughJass*
Because bad always outweighs the good.



This McCown guy just wants controversy, it seems. The Messier argument is silly, too.

HughJass* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2007, 07:37 AM
  #15
Hockeynomad
Registered User
 
Hockeynomad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Mississauga
Country: Canada
Posts: 518
vCash: 500
Messier is a classy guy, but his leadership skills overrated and over-hyped.

Speaking of leadership skills, no one beat Jean Beliveau.

I know in 1968 season, the Habs were in first place and Beliveau had a major injury and the club slid to near last place. Upon his return months later, the club embarked on a winning streak and finished in first.

As far as Slovakia being a great hockey nation, perhaps. But the same can be said for Latvia. Awesome fans.

Hockeynomad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2007, 12:13 PM
  #16
Sensfanman
Registered User
 
Sensfanman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Storminator16 View Post
Because bad always outweighs the good.



This McCown guy just wants controversy, it seems. The Messier argument is silly, too.
Bob McCown is the sports talk radio host on the Fan 590. He's pretty well known (they broadcast his prime time radio show on TV). He does tend to cause a bit of controversy but that's because he speaks his mind. It seems this book is him speaking his mind but in on paper.

Just an FYI

Sensfanman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2007, 12:09 PM
  #17
cupcrazyman
In Shanny We Trust
 
cupcrazyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Parts Unknown
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,472
vCash: 500
Bob McCowan controversial ?

Ju$t his way to gain an audience and $ell some book$

cupcrazyman 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 12:11 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.