Fans chose him for one and only one reason and that was to mock the event. They took advantage of the league leaving the selection process open for fans to pick players they believe were deserving of all star status. Nobody voting truly believed Scott was deserving. He didn't belong there on merit alone. Explain to me this "great human piece story" because all I see Scott as was a tool that fans (I use that term lightly as I don't understand why a fan of the league would like to stick it to them) used to mock the event. He actually went along with it which made things worse as it's like he didn't' understand he was part of the joke and he was selected only because he wasn't good at hockey and not because he was good at it.
Doesn't matter the reason. If you let the fans choose a player, you opened the door for this to happen.
The great story piece was exactly what you saw at the time. Guy that never should have been there played well, scored some nice goals and the players rallied around him as he ended up MVP. People loved it. A multitude of stories were written on it. It was a feel good piece in an otherwise light hearted and normally boring event.
I can see missing all of that suffering from cranky old man syndrome, but it made for a great story to the majority of people at the time.
The Following User Says Thank You to GoJetsGo For This Useful Post:
But it will turn on what's happening between Pekka Rinne's ears. So far, he's completely choked.
It always comes down to goaltending.
Nashville would be in bigger trouble if they had been playing like crap. They've lost playing well enough to win both games IMO. If Laviolette makes the right move, and I think he will, Suaros will be between the pipes on Saturday.
The series is by no means over considering how good Nashville has been on home ice for this playoffs and really the better part of the last few years.
__________________
I hate to tell you this, but I’ve just launched an air biscuit
Doesn't matter the reason. If you let the fans choose a player, you opened the door for this to happen.
The great story piece was exactly what you saw at the time. Guy that never should have been there played well, scored some nice goals and the players rallied around him as he ended up MVP. People loved it. A multitude of stories were written on it. It was a feel good piece in an otherwise light hearted and normally boring event.
I can see missing all of that suffering from cranky old man syndrome, but it made for a great story to the majority of people at the time.
Funny thing is that you have to be arguably the crankiest poster on this site.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Erick Estrada For This Useful Post:
Funny thing is that you have to be arguably the crankiest poster on this site.
You'd be the reason you stuck 'arguably' in there.
As I said, denying the wide spread sentiment that most people enjoyed the story of Scott at the all star game is nothing more than "Get off my lawn" territory.
You'd be the reason you stuck 'arguably' in there.
Ha ha ha I suck that in because there are a few others here that can get pretty cranky at times. I think plenty of people would agree that they have disagreed with me numerous times on this site but I don't think that most would place me anywhere near your lofty heights of grumpiness and hostility. Anyway this thread should carry on free from us arguing Scott which isn't a topic really in this thread.
Ha ha ha. I think plenty of people would agree that they have disagreed with me numerous times on this site but I don't think that most would place me anywhere near your lofty heights of grumpiness and hostility.
What plenty of people wouldn't agree with is your take on Scott at the all-star game, but that's why you've moved off it onto the typical whining about me schtick. Typical, but boring. If you'd like to further discuss how you're an inherently negative individual vs. how you fine me hostile, feel free to PM me and I'll ignore it.
What plenty of people wouldn't agree with is your take on Scott at the all-star game, but that's why you've moved off it onto the typical whining about me schtick. Typical, but boring. If you'd like to further discuss how you're an inherently negative individual vs. how you fine me hostile, feel free to PM me and I'll ignore it.
Me whining about you? Didn't you bring up the "cranky old man syndrome" thing first? This is why you have your reputation here. Just let it go.
Jesus, GoJetsGo. Every second day, like clockwork you do this. You have to understand that everyone else isn't the problem at this point, no? There's too many encounters for the problem not to lie with you.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jayswin For This Useful Post:
Jesus, GoJetsGo. Every second day, like clockwork you do this. You have to understand that everyone else isn't the problem at this point, no? There's too many encounters for the problem not to lie with you.
That is a huge exaggeration on your part. But if you're annoyed by me, feel free to use the ignore feature.
Apparently Laviolette isn't telling the media which goaltender will start on Saturday. My knee jerk reaction last night was that he should go with Saros but I thought about the similarities to the Ducks/Oilers series where the Ducks outplayed the Oilers in the first two games but Talbot stood on his head while Gibson was shaky in losing the first two games in Anaheim. I was at that time wondering how they could win that series with such a disparity between goaltending but Carlyle stuck with Gibson and it was the right call as he actually got better as the playoffs went along. In this situation it's a little different in that Rinne started off the playoffs great and has tapered off so do you go back to Rinne and hope he gets his game back or do you go with Saros who has shown this season he's not really a drop off in quality? I think I stick with Rinne but if he lets in a softie first goal like last night and is still fighting the puck I give him the Gulutzan treatment and yank him for good and see if the other guy can turn the tied in the series.
The Quest stands upon the edge of a knife. Stray but a little, and it will fail, to the ruin of all. Yet hope remains while the Company is true. Go Flames Go!
What about the comment from Weekes in that video (1:14) that Subban "...is the first fully-black superstar in the history of our league?"
So I guess there's a "black-o-meter" for torchbearers like Iggy and Fuhr? I wonder what that's like for them? White sees them as Black, but Black sees them as not Black enough? That's a whole other layer of racism there.
Edit: (Don't get me wrong. Weekes is obviously 100% correct that Subban is "fully-black." Also, Iginla and Fuhr each had one Black parent and one White parent, so he's technically correct that Subban is the first "fully-black" superstar. It's just that the way he said it gives me the impression that Black people maybe don't see Iginla and Fuhr as the standard bearers that White people see them as. Like when some White guy refers to Fuhr as the "first Black person to win a Cup," do Black people roll their eyes and go, "yeah whatever?" That's got to be crazy to deal with.)
1 at 
4
must show all Flames games nationally when they play on Saturdays, Mondays, and Wednesdays !!!
