[PGT] Flames lose 6-3 vs Avs

[AR_Six]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I would think that, as a Nucks fan, you would be personally familiar with the situation you reference.

Not really - I tend to get my hockey fix out of good hockey games rather than hockey games my team is in. For example, the Sabres / Bruins last night was more fun to watch for me than most Canucks games are, win or lose. So even if they're bad I can get my fix somewhere else. As far as the rest of the fanbase goes, the last time the team was really bad was over a decade ago and I would have been in high school. I don't really remember remarking on the behaviour of the fanbase.

Originally Posted by Kaine

Of course a fanbase will be happier and cheer harder when there team is winning, what proof do you have that people stop watching Flames hockey or stop caring about the team when they are not doing well. You must have something because you claim it as a phenomenon.

Did you even read what I wrote? What I'm talking about is not whether people cheer harder when they're winning. I'm talking about people not being able to satisfy themselves watching their own team and having to derive their hockey enjoyment elsewhere - namely by cheering against teams they hate. The longer and more significant the malaise, the more this gains steam and the fans become more concerned with the misfortunes of teams they don't like than the fortunes of their own team (which are too depressing to be worth it).

I doubt you will find many examples of your theory here.

I find TONS of examples of my theory here precisely BECAUSE this is a message board and no one feels any need to tone down ire or bile on the internet generally regardless of the topic of discussion.

[AR_Six]

On the topic of the Chicago game I would be not at all surprised to see the Flames pull out a win.

The Flames should be extremely motivated after last night;
It's a HNIC night;
The Hawks are on the second half of a back to back;
The Hawks should suffer an emotional let down after a rivalry game tonight;
Corey Crawford can't be this good forever; and
Kiprusoff can't be as bad as he was against Colorado two games in a row.

[AltaGuy]

Man Cammalleri looks bad.

We're only 1-3-1. I'm not really too worried, and there're lots of bright spots so far. Hudler is definitely one of them, and Cervenka looks pretty slick too.

Still don't understand why we put wingers as centers though.

[sa226]

Two guys that need to be rewarded with ice-time: Hudler, Backlund.

Hudler goes without saying.

I was really impressed when Backlund later in the game decided to kick it up a notch, he didn't have anything to show for it but the guy continually gets better and better.

I wish Hartley would ride the guys that are engaged in the game, instead of hoping for struggling veterans to shake the rust.

Glencross was dangerous last night.....dangerous to his own team.

Tanguay was fighting the puck all night.

Iginla's best shift was on the PK, which is both awesome and troubling.

In a "what have you done for me lately" type of opinion. That loss is on Kipper. Anytime we established a lead, he let in a soft goal.

I also don't think this should have been as automatic a win as some people thought. The flames, while I believe they have the potential to be a decent team, they are far from elite and they are still finding their way with the new players, coach and new system. this early in the season, you need to play. They were sluggish and looked like a team that had been sitting while everybody else was getting into game shape.

Colorado came in desperate. It showed.

The great equalizer in these situations has always been Kipper. But he was off his game too and that sealed it.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by VANFLAMESFAN

Flames beat them 5-2 and 3-1 at home last year. The year prior, Calgary won 7-2 and 3-1 at home as well.

The 7-1 Hawks win in Calgary was the season prior, nearly three years ago.

Flames have won 4 straight at home to Chicago, they play them well at home.

Sounds like the best team in the NHL this year is due for a win in Calgary. Could get ugly.

[Stay Golden]

It takes a special kind of suck to lose to a team that had got into town only 15 hrs prior to the game missing their best player and captain. On a losing streak...it just goes on and on with this Flames team to start off seasons just the same.

[The Big Thirsty]

Originally Posted by VANFLAMESFAN

Flames beat them 5-2 and 3-1 at home last year. The year prior, Calgary won 7-2 and 3-1 at home as well.

The 7-1 Hawks win in Calgary was the season prior, nearly three years ago.

Flames have won 4 straight at home to Chicago, they play them well at home.

That 7-1 game was the game I was talking about. Left at the second intermission. I was quite certain it wasn't last year, but didn't think it was that far back. Christ does time ever fly.

[MikeMc]

Originally Posted by AR_Six

I was only trolling in the manner I phrased it. I am actually serious about this because I've noticed it happening in two cases now: Senators fans, and Flames fans.

When the team is good, the fans have something to derive hockey enjoyment from: a relevant team, wins, etc. They dislike their team's rivals but are more concerned with beating them than watching how they do on out of town games. I.e., a Senators fan right now is generally more interested in the lineup against the Hurricanes than whether the Leafs are losing. That wasn't so when the Leafs were decent - I had a bunch of friends who were Sens fans when I was in school and in the years their team was bad they seemed to care a lot more about the Leafs losing. Once the team got good, they stopped caring so much.

Similarly with Flames fans in recent years. There is an incredible amount of acerbic bitterness among hockey fans in this city nowadays. There's not much to be happy about or enjoy in hockey if you're a Flames fan, and so the majority of Flames fans' hockey fix seems to come from pure schadenfreude. It's been noticeably on the rise the longer this reign of mediocrity continues.

I actually don't agree at all that this is a "bandwagoner" issue. Bandwagoners would not let hockey losses impact their mood or demeanor. Bandwagoners simply stop caring about hockey altogether when the team isn't doing well, and suddenly become raving "GO FLAMES GO" chanting fans once they make the playoffs. The aforementioned phenomenon is actually stronger among die-hards.

Is a term like schadenfreude really necessary?

Using a fancy term just makes you seem hebetudinous and platitudinous.

[AC]

I don't know why not; it's a perfectly cromulent word.

[Rudee]

It was scoring slumps like these where Jokinen stepped up to the plate. I'm sure we can count on him to bail us out once again. Oh wait... we traded him.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Rudee

It was scoring slumps like these where Jokinen stepped up to the plate. I'm sure we can count on him to bail us out once again. Oh wait... we traded him.

Correction, the big mac meal stepped up to the plate

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Rudee

It was scoring slumps like these where Jokinen stepped up to the plate. I'm sure we can count on him to bail us out once again. Oh wait... we traded him.

You wish! He was actually let go for no compensation...

[drewtastic]

Originally Posted by AC

I don't know why not; it's a perfectly cromulent word.

I have been immensely embiggened by this post.

[MikeMc]

Agreed. Look at me kvetch over nothing.

[AR_Six]

Originally Posted by MikeMc

Is a term like schadenfreude really necessary?

Using a fancy term just makes you seem hebetudinous and platitudinous.

I do not know of an English word that approximates the meaning.

[Stay Golden]

what kind of tommyrot is going on

[browna]

Originally Posted by AC

Roger Millions ‏@RogMillions
Cory Sarich appears to be odd man out on defence at #Flames practice.

Not a surprise...I think he was hurt. Only time I saw him on the ice in the 3rd last night was during a TV timeout or the Avs timeout, and he was testing one of his feet or legs.

Edit: just checked NHL.com, played a few shifts in the second, one in the third.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

You wish! He was actually let go for no compensation...

Remember that time Calgary didn't trade their #1 centre who they had no intention of keeping beyond the year except for in 'just in case scenarios', they just let him walk away for free?

Those were the days. Those were the days.

[Yorkshire Flame]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Remember that time Calgary didn't trade their #1 centre who they had no intention of keeping beyond the year except for in 'just in case scenarios', they just let him walk away for free?

Those were the days. Those were the days.

Even better: remember when said Centre had a NTC and stated publicly that he would not waive?

[MissTeeks]

@SUNGilbertson: #Flames Hartley on Cervenka: "It's maintenance. The most important thing for me is, is he playing or not? And he going to be playing."