HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Would you rather have the Rangers?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-02-2004, 06:15 PM
  #1
MiamiScreamingEagles
Global Moderator
A Fistful of Dollars
 
MiamiScreamingEagles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 40,865
vCash: 1170
Would you rather have the Rangers?

A question for Flyers loyalists. If somehow the future could be decided and you were told that the Flyers would win the Stanley Cup in 2004 under this one condition: that the 2005-2014 seasons would have the same results (regular season and post season) as the Rangers have had from 1995-2004 after winning their Cup in 1994, would you agree to it?

MiamiScreamingEagles is offline  
Old
03-02-2004, 06:18 PM
  #2
Brad*
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 13,887
vCash: 500
Yes.

With the amount of NHL teams there are today, and the parity in the league there would be no guarantee that they would win in my lifetime.

Brad* is offline  
Old
03-02-2004, 06:39 PM
  #3
donelikedinner
Registered User
 
donelikedinner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: In a house
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,548
vCash: 500
win today. worry about the future tomorrow.

donelikedinner is offline  
Old
03-02-2004, 06:47 PM
  #4
Big Bill
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Land of milk & honey
Posts: 1,302
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Big Bill Send a message via MSN to Big Bill
Quote:
Originally Posted by donelikedinner
win today. worry about the future tomorrow.
I am a Rags fan and would take that CUP in 94 for this futility anyday. A lot of the fans on these boards value prospects over cups. It is swayed this year due to the uncertainty of the lockout and financial considerations. Otherwise, if you have a legit shot at the cup, you sell the farm. The Rags main problems were post 1994. I mean Vancouver rebuilt after that Cup finals. We kept holding on to an aging tea, signing ufas, trading draft picks, making bad picks, trading prospects. I think people are a bot fooled thinking ddeveloping prospects can build dynasties, but I think in this NHL, there really cannot be one like Edmonton or the Isles of the 70-80s.

But that cup was worth it.

Big Bill is offline  
Old
03-02-2004, 07:20 PM
  #5
FlyHigh
Registered User
 
FlyHigh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 28,156
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to FlyHigh Send a message via MSN to FlyHigh
take the cup...

FlyHigh is offline  
Old
03-02-2004, 07:29 PM
  #6
Toonces
The beer kitty
 
Toonces's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New Jersey
Country: Ireland
Posts: 3,676
vCash: 500
Of course I would. I just want to see one damn Cup win.

I was born in 1978, so I obviously have no real frame of refrence from the two Cup wins.

Toonces is offline  
Old
03-02-2004, 07:43 PM
  #7
RoDu
Registered User
 
RoDu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,526
vCash: 500
take the cup, but unlike the Rangers, we would eventually rebuild

RoDu is offline  
Old
03-02-2004, 08:47 PM
  #8
Rails
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: LBurg and FBurg, VA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,334
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rails
We'd probably stay in the playoffs too. But for they sake of the question, yes a cup win, then a lock out, and then 4-5 years of no playoffs would be a ok with me.

Rails is offline  
Old
03-02-2004, 09:00 PM
  #9
Shadowtron
Registered User
 
Shadowtron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,532
vCash: 500
I think there's more myth to the whole Rangers-still-paying-for-cup notion. It was ten years ago. I don't care how badly you decimate your club, it doesn't cost you ten years of success. As someone here said, "unlike the Rangers, we'd rebuild". During that year there was nothing to rebuild! The core of Rangers were still young or relatively young. Messier was only 33, Leetch, Richter, Graves were all 25-26. Kovalev was only 21, Zubov was 21, Buek was in his 20's. The problem comes from the fact that the Rangers don't know when to quit. They're not losing because they won the cup, they're losing because they're trying to add on to THAT hockey team. Rather than tear it down after the first two misses, they kept trying to bandage the rickety machine and convince everyone that it was brand new, just had a few parts missing. The FLYER'S would have rebuilt. If they were dangling Zubov and Nedved, and were offered, then an unknown, Tkachuk and a relatively unknown Selanne, they'd have jumped at the offer. Worse case they could have parlayed that into a trade that addresses other needs. The Rangers scoffed at that trade and opted for Luc Robataille and Ulf Samuelsson. Then they continued to toss away decent young players for vets like Momesso, Kurri, Churla, etc. etc. That, in my opinion, has cost the Rangers 7 years of playoff hockey. For the life of me, I can't see Clarke half that amount of time.


Anyway, gotta go. Rangers a set to lose to Atlanta tonight. Later

Shadowtron is offline  
Old
03-03-2004, 09:30 AM
  #10
tytech
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 1,357
vCash: 500
Definitely. We keep trading away our youth and we'll be out of the playoffs for seven years straight soon anyway.

tytech is offline  
Old
03-03-2004, 09:50 AM
  #11
blah
Registered User
 
blah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tytech
Definitely. We keep trading away our youth and we'll be out of the playoffs for seven years straight soon anyway.
I highly doubt that.

blah is offline  
Old
03-03-2004, 10:49 AM
  #12
flyercide
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 891
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiamiScreamingEagles
A question for Flyers loyalists. If somehow the future could be decided and you were told that the Flyers would win the Stanley Cup in 2004 under this one condition: that the 2005-2014 seasons would have the same results (regular season and post season) as the Rangers have had from 1995-2004 after winning their Cup in 1994, would you agree to it?
I would. I watched those 6 or so years without playoff hockey and it was still fun to watch. Mostly because of Lindros.. but still I wouldn't think twice about it.

flyercide is offline  
Old
03-03-2004, 11:22 AM
  #13
The Flash
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Korea (South of Cour
Country: South Korea
Posts: 1,160
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyerfanofthepeg
take the cup, but unlike the Rangers, we would eventually rebuild
The post says, the exact future. That being said... I would take the Cup. 7 years is tough, but with a hard cap coming, the Flyers will be screwed either way with the load of fat contracts they have.

The Flash is offline  
Closed Thread

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 12:28 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.