[PGT] I'd 8-4 that game to be the norm. Chicago wins

[Reign of Fire]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Well, there were two sets of quick goals.

The ones on Rittich that made it 4-2 were 1:04 apart, after which the Flames got it back to 4-3

The second set of 2 quick goals on Talbot were 27 seconds apart and made it 6-3

The Flames scored 4 goals. Which set of 2 sank ‘em?

Which ones do you think I mean? They fought back to tie it...obviously the latter two sank them. You can only fight back so many times.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Well that sucks.

But really, first game back after a road trip against a hungry team? You can’t expect to win that game really, playoff race or no playoff race.

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

The odds were totally stacked against them. No good team is going to win that game.

This is a super late response, but I just feel I have to say something about it.

I don't know if this is just some on the forum that say it, or every fanbase has this kind of philosophy, but it makes no sense whatsoever that we make these kinda of excuses for the franchise history the Flames have had for the past couple of decades.

I guess because the Flames have been one of the most mediocre franchises in that span, that we're so conditioned to losing. We pass on excuses for games where the odds are LARGELY in favour for the Flames actually. The Flames are at home which should be an advantage, won three of their past four games where they've light the lamp each time, and playing against a weak team that's been on a bad losing skid. How the #### do you get tuned, giving up 8 goals out of that?

The Flames inconsistency is madneing, but it's always how they have been save for a few seasons, because that's how mediocre teams perform. So I suppose that the quotes above are relevant when it comes to the Flames, but it's not the norm for hockey teams in general; especially good quality teams that have chances of making a playoff run.

EDIT: And now reading further, I see the sarcasm in your posts. Okay I'll check myself out.

[Strange Brew]

^ ironically the post immediately after my first one brought out the tried and true “trap game” comment.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Joborule

This is a super late response, but I just feel I have to say something about it.

I don't know if this is just some on the forum that say it, or every fanbase has this kind of philosophy, but it makes no sense whatsoever that we make these kinda of excuses for the franchise history the Flames have had for the past couple of decades.

I guess because the Flames have been one of the most mediocre franchises in that span, that we're so conditioned to losing. We pass on excuses for games where the odds are LARGELY in favour for the Flames actually. The Flames are at home which should be an advantage, won three of their past four games where they've light the lamp each time, and playing against a weak team that's been on a bad losing skid. How the #### do you get tuned, giving up 8 goals out of that?

The Flames inconsistency is madneing, but it's always how they have been save for a few seasons, because that's how mediocre teams perform. So I suppose that the quotes above are relevant when it comes to the Flames, but it's not the norm for hockey teams in general; especially good quality teams that have chances of making a playoff run.

It is a marked commentary sbout this board when high level sarcasm like what strange brew and Aarongavey are laying down in this thread is perceived as serious commentary.

I don't blame you at all for not seeing it, it's nearly imperceptible compared to much of the same fawning and team servitude that goes on here.

The flames just had the doors blown off twice in a week and it's still rough to tell if someone is being sarcastic or not about whether the flames are a good team that just had a bad night.

Just to clarify, he is making a joke about how this team sucks.

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

It is a marked commentary sbout this board when high level sarcasm like what strange brew and Aarongavey are laying down in this thread is perceived as serious commentary.

I don't blame you at all for not seeing it, it's nearly imperceptible compared to much of the same fawning and team servitude that goes on here.

The flames just had the doors blown off twice in a week and it's still rough to tell if someone is being sarcastic or not about whether the flames are a good team that just had a bad night.

Just to clarify, he is making a joke about how this team sucks.

Apparently except for a couple of unfortunate breakdowns the Flames played “great” last night.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

^ ironically the post immediately after my first one brought out the tried and true “trap game” comment.

If this is directed at me, I will say it again, “trap game” is not an excuse. It’s an indictment. Good teams don’t fall victim to trap games. Trap games are ones that lazy and unfocused teams lose.

Coaches tell their teams an upcoming game is a “trap game” to remind them not to take it lightly.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

Apparently except for a couple of unfortunate breakdowns the Flames played “great” last night.

They just didn't get the bounces!

[Strange Brew]

The term “trap game” is not one I would use for this club. It implies a superior club being trapped by an inferior opponent through taking them lightly.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

The term “trap game” is not one I would use for this club. It implies a superior club being trapped by an inferior opponent through taking them lightly.

Calgary, though mediocre, is a superior to Chicago, which is beginning a rebuild.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Calgary, though mediocre, is a superior to Chicago, which is beginning a rebuild.

Calgary though is fighting for their playoff lives. There's a strong possibility that Chicago's and Calgary's season will end on the very same day.

There's no reason for the Flames to be looking past the Blackhawks. Especially when only two games alone, they lost to a team worse than the Blackhawks, and as a result lost the season series as a whole.

I don't think Flames were looking past them to make it a trap game. It's just simply the team is not good. So they will continue to have duds against teams worse then them in the standings on a occasional basis.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Joborule

Calgary though is fighting for their playoff lives. There's a strong possibility that Chicago's and Calgary's season will end on the very same day.

There's no reason for the Flames to be looking past the Blackhawks. Especially when only two games alone, they lost to a team worse than the Blackhawks, and as a result lost the season series as a whole.

I don't think Flames were looking past them to make it a trap game. It's just simply the team is not good. So they will continue to have duds against teams worse then them in the standings on a occasional basis.

I think they got back after a decent road trip, slept in their own beds, had an easier opponent, and didn’t give the effort they needed. I don’t know if it’s looking past so much as they seem to get very easily satisfied, from game to game and even within a game (they tied it up and then figured “we’re good”).

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Calgary, though mediocre, is a superior to Chicago, which is beginning a rebuild.

Chicago is 6 points back of Calgary with 2 games in hand. They have one less regulation win and now, a better goal differential.

If Calgary is superior, it’s not being measured by the things that matter.

But we’ll always have last year.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Chicago is 6 points back of Calgary with 2 games in hand. They have one less regulation win and now, a better goal differential.

If Calgary is superior, it’s not being measured by the things that matter.

But we’ll always have last year.

Aren’t points things that matter?

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Chicago is 6 points back of Calgary with 2 games in hand. They have one less regulation win and now, a better goal differential.

If Calgary is superior, it’s not being measured by the things that matter.

But we’ll always have last year.

Except points....the only thing that actually matters, Calgary has more of them

[getoverit]

nahhhh they get participation ribbons

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Aren’t points things that matter?

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Except points....the only thing that actually matters, Calgary has more of them

Did you read what I posted? That’s the first thing I said.

Of course some people say it’s the game on the ice that matters.

[Manhattanboy]

After last night’s debacle Flames playoff chances dropped 18.6% to 42.3%.

Playoff snake on life support.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Except points....the only thing that actually matters, Calgary has more of them

By 6 points. 3 wins, and you get 6 points from that.

Calgary is not that much more superior than the Blackhawks, if at all. They are within the same tier as each other by that separation.

This is not like a Tampa Bay spread we're talking about here. Big difference being seperated by 6 points (3 wins), and 23 points (11.5 wins).

[stang]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Chicago is 6 points back of Calgary with 2 games in hand. They have one less regulation win and now, a better goal differential.

If Calgary is superior, it’s not being measured by the things that matter.

But we’ll always have last year.

They played less games and in a tougher division.

[Duffalufagus]

This is bad hockey team. By almost any objective measure.

Don’t do anything. Hire a coach in the summer. Go from there. Do not buy anything.