osmosis Posted January 4, 2011 Report Share Posted January 4, 2011 While I said Clouston shouldn't be fired, I don't think he'll be sticking around. I believe his contarct is up at the end of the season and I don't see it being extended. As for Murray, I think he was one of the best coaches the sens have ever had. I'd love to see him go back behind the bench. But I hope that he isn't given another contract at the end of the season as GM. I read the Sun (yeah, I know it's not the best for hockey news as it's mainly rumors) but there was an interesting bit about Pierre McGuire as the new GM. I don't quite know how I feel about that though. Yes, I read this as well. I think Murray should go back behind the bench. Ottawa had the greatest of success with him, and I never understood why you would want to change a winning formula. Despite people's dislikes of the guy, I think Pierre McGuire would actually make a good GM. He's been around the league for a number of years, he has that star power b/c of TSN, and his broadcasting career has given him insight into the dynamics of players, teams, and the game itself. He might have some really good ideas on how to re-build the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apache Posted January 4, 2011 Report Share Posted January 4, 2011 Yeah, watching Washington's coach and then comparing him to Blysma, I'm thinking: these guys are both NHL coaches??? Blysma is so much more professional, polite and competent, and seemed to be much better with his family life. Boudreau was like a broken f record, it got old after about an hour and I honestly thought he was too stupid to respect as a player, it was an interesting juxtaposition watching him in his jeans with his gorging belly meeting with the suave, well dressed Caps GM McPhee. Something tells me HBO had something behind that F meter heading downhill. I agree with the notion that true, emotional fights borne out of competitiveness are entertaining whereas some Orr/Boogard gongshow just gets old, but when you see guys trying to take out someone like Avery you know they're totally legitimately pissed off, and that I have no problem with. I watch it. It's a really well done show. Funny thing is that in the 1st 2 episodes, Bruce's Fmeter was something like 60+ times and in the 3rd episode, he toned it down to only 4 times. Plus, I also like a Pens a bit more. Actually, I just like their coach a bit more. The line between sports and entertainment is blurred. Staged fights I could do without (like an Orr vs Carkner). But, something like an Iginla vs Lecavalier doesn't hurt the "integrity of the game". It's 2 great players fighting for the grand prize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garret9 Posted January 4, 2011 Report Share Posted January 4, 2011 man, i wish i could find a girl who wants to talk about hockey and sports. you're right, clouston should not be fired. they should rebuild the team and let him coach the young kids. i think murray should either go back behind the bench or should relinquish the GM role to another. My wife likes and watches hockey (and other sports with me)! Plus she likes a lot of the same music and goes to shows with me. I win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
premed89 Posted January 4, 2011 Report Share Posted January 4, 2011 Fighting is really useful for teams at certain points in the game and depending on their performance. A lot of times, a fighter may be sent out to try and shift the momentum over to their team to try and motivate the players to play better. I also have to comment on the physical play of the CANADA game. I'd say Canada/USA game but honestly, Canada absolutely dominated USA in every aspect. Canada has been extremely physical throughout the entire tournament and by no means was I expecting team USA to match up to team Canada's big hitters. On a side note, what does everyone think about Kassian being kept out for 2 games? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yamahac Posted January 4, 2011 Report Share Posted January 4, 2011 I'll need some photo ID. If Sens want any chance of making it to the playoffs next year, they need to get rid of the aging Kovalev and Alfredsson. Alfredsson is probably retiring after this season anyway. I don't see him retiring. He's going to get paid 4.5 mil if he stays on for 1 more year. I don't think they'll be a contender anytime soon. Their forward corps is abysmal and they don't have any solid goaltending. They should rebuild around their young up and coming defencemen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apache Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 on a pro US note, I thought Campbell looked better than Visentin, then again Visentin didn't really face anything so thats hard to judge Fighting is really useful for teams at certain points in the game and depending on their performance. A lot of times, a fighter may be sent out to try and shift the momentum over to their team to try and motivate the players to play better. I also have to comment on the physical play of the CANADA game. I'd say Canada/USA game but honestly, Canada absolutely dominated USA in every aspect. Canada has been extremely physical throughout the entire tournament and by no means was I expecting team USA to match up to team Canada's big hitters. On a side note, what does everyone think about Kassian being kept out for 2 games? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thatonekid Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 I'll need some photo ID. If Sens want any chance of making it to the playoffs next year, they need to get rid of the aging Kovalev and Alfredsson. Alfredsson is probably retiring after this season anyway. Photo ID...to stalk me?!? lol. A lot of my posts in the WED thread make it clear that I'm a girl. Anyway, Kovalev's contract is up at the end of the season (I'm 95% sure that it is and can't be bothered to look it up to confirm). He's not going to be re-signed. Alfie's not going anywhere though. He's basically the heart of this team; his nickname is "god". He's also said he want's to play for a few more seasons, so he probably won't be retiring. If they need to get rid of anyone, it's Gonchar and Kuba. I don't see him retiring. He's going to get paid 4.5 mil if he stays on for 1 more year. I don't think they'll be a contender anytime soon. Their forward corps is abysmal and they don't have any solid goaltending. They should rebuild around their young up and coming defencemen. I agree with your assessment, as much as it makes me sad. They've drafted some good D (Karlsson, Cowen, Rundblad) but they need to start drafting forwards. Watching a team like Colorado makes me envious. on a pro US note, I thought Campbell looked better than Visentin, then again Visentin didn't really face anything so thats hard to judge Campbell was really good this entire tournament. He deserved the player of the game award. Too bad that he didn't get any scoring support since Canada shut the US skaters down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
premed89 Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 on a pro US note, I thought Campbell looked better than Visentin, then again Visentin didn't really face anything so thats hard to judge I agree with that... Campbell played very well, Visentin did make some impressive saves, but for the most part the Canadian team shut down the US offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jp.mylittlepwny Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 Holy crap I'm getting jitters. GO CANADA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leap87 Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 Oh Canadaaaaaaaaaa... you suck. Now I can go back to bed and just laugh. What a terrible game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
proton Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 I think I'll go cry myself to sleep now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
premed89 Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 Oh Canadaaaaaaaaaa... you suck. Now I can go back to bed and just laugh. What a terrible game. A terrible 3rd period.... For you to say it was a terrible game, that's a stretch... They played about 40 minutes and that was it.. I'm still saying, 'what the hell just happened'... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tooty Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 it has to be some sort of record for most epic comeback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
proton Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 it has to be some sort of record for most epic comeback. It was. Biggest comeback in WJC history says TSN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanMaverick Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 On the bright side, Canucks get their 7th straight win. Best team in the NHL. Most excited I've ever been about their chances - I'm totally going to a playoff game or two this year. I really hope they're not peaking way too early though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garret9 Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 Best team in the NHL. Most excited I've ever been about their chances - I'm totally going to a playoff game or two this year. I really hope they're not peaking way too early though. you don't want to jinx it! thats a bit of a canuck tradition Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apache Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 when i left the gym it was like 3-0 going into the third, and i just found out canada lost... seriously, this is disgusting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thatonekid Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 Oh Canadaaaaaaaaaa... you suck. Now I can go back to bed and just laugh. What a terrible game. Disagree, 100% A terrible 3rd period.... For you to say it was a terrible game, that's a stretch...They played about 40 minutes and that was it.. I'm still saying, 'what the hell just happened'... This. When Russia scored their 1st goal, I said something like "They're going to tie it up by the end of the period". I didn't expect another goal 13 seconds later though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leap87 Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 You know why they lost? Obviously, the coach is the problem. BUT it was because they scored 3 goals and they relaxed (thinking they were going to win) and Russians just used this. Not only that, Russians had nothing to lose being 3-0 down... so, when you've got nothing to lose, you start risking and it paid off (it ALWAYS does). So BAD mentality of our hockey players + coach (didn't change/adapt the game to the changes) = LOSS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hking03 Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 so, when you've got nothing to lose, you start risking and it paid off (it ALWAYS does). So BAD mentality of our hockey players + coach (didn't change/adapt the game to the changes) = LOSS. i'd have to disagree with this- when you start risking it, it doesn't always pay off... in fact teams in hockey and other sports get burned regularly for "risking it". But, like they say- no risk no reward. i'd also say that this applies to life in general... too much risk and you run the risk of getting burned. some people are luckier than others and get away with it, but i've seen people make one risky decision and end up with the short end of the stick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thatonekid Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 You know why they lost? Obviously, the coach is the problem. BUT it was because they scored 3 goals and they relaxed (thinking they were going to win) and Russians just used this. Not only that, Russians had nothing to lose being 3-0 down... so, when you've got nothing to lose, you start risking and it paid off (it ALWAYS does). So BAD mentality of our hockey players + coach (didn't change/adapt the game to the changes) = LOSS. I agree with most of this. The thing about your previous post was that Canada didn't suck and they didn't play a terrible game. They just had an inexcusably poor 3rd period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osmosis Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 You know why they lost? Obviously, the coach is the problem. BUT it was because they scored 3 goals and they relaxed (thinking they were going to win) and Russians just used this. Not only that, Russians had nothing to lose being 3-0 down... so, when you've got nothing to lose, you start risking and it paid off (it ALWAYS does). So BAD mentality of our hockey players + coach (didn't change/adapt the game to the changes) = LOSS. there's actually an old wives tail that tells a 3-0 lead in hockey is actually the worst kind. i think it's been storied that many teams become complacent when up by this margin, which often results in the other team tying and winning the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hking03 Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 there's actually an old wives tail that tells a 3-0 lead in hockey is actually the worst kind. i think it's been storied that many teams become complacent when up by this margin, which often results in the other team tying and winning the game. i always thought it was the 2-0 lead in hockey... because one goal means the other team is back in it. whereas, with a 3-0 lead you would have to have a monumental lapse or breakdown to have 3 goals scored against you, let alone a 4th or 5th to win the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thatonekid Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 i always thought it was the 2-0 lead in hockey... because one goal means the other team is back in it. whereas, with a 3-0 lead you would have to have a monumental lapse or breakdown to have 3 goals scored against you, let alone a 4th or 5th to win the game. Valid arguments have been made for both the 2 goal lead and the 3 goal lead being the worst. I'm going to go with the worst lead being whatever one the opposition ends up comming back from to win the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garret9 Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 Go team Germany... Oh... nm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.