aarond

Sheff is starting to heat up.

Ok, I actually agree with you there. It's fun to talk about, but getting all worked up over it is pretty silly.

No, we can't. Some of us like talking about this stuff. We know it doesn't prove anything. But it's a way to express your opinion about players, and some of us like that. Nobody is forcing you to read or participate in these discussions.

I pointed him out because, in my opinion, he is the one who most blatantly doesn't belong.

It's a beautiful game

THe Tigers are going to be fine. They haven't had their "Mojo" and they're still on pace for almost 90 wins. You know they're going to play better than this at some point. They'll hit better, they'll hold leads better, and they're going to get a boost to their starting pitching in the second half when Roaster returns. If this is how they play without their "Mojo," then they'll be the best team in baseball with their Mojo.

I was thinking the same thing. According to this poll, Ozzie is better than Mike Richter, Mike Vernon, Ron Hextall, Bernie Parent, and Billy Smith, just to name a few. That's ridiculous.

Good God man. We're not even out of April and you already writing an obituary? They haven't played very well at all so far this season and they are still on pace for about 89 wins. They're going to play better eventually. They're going to start hitting, and you know they're going to do a better job of holding onto leads than they've done so far. I guess it's not just a Red Wings fan thing. It looks like it's a Detroit fan thing. Maybe it's because Detroiters are just used to bad things happening to them that they automatically assume the worst the second some adversity rears its head. Who knows?

IS that all you got? I think that's the second time you've used that one on me. This keeps going in one ear and out the other with some of you: just because the team is losing doesn't mean they aren't trying. Just because somebody fouls up and the puck winds up in our net doesn't mean they aren't putting forth any effort. For crying out loud, quit being so simplisticly cliched. The Wings effort has been high for most of the playoffs. They have some occasional let downs and foul ups because they are human beings, but it's pathetic watching some of you resort to your go-to "they don't want it" card everytime something bad happens. But at no point has this series been "over," or the Calgary series. SOme of you act like you've never been through a playoff season before. UPS AND DOWNS all the way through. And it's just getting started, so buckle up. Get over myself? I'm still trying to get over some of you guys. If you guys can't take it now, how in the blue hell are you going to survive if the Wings go deep?

It was certainly a joke. It wasn't funny. The only thing about the comment that is funny is the fact that there are people who honestly believe that Brett Hull honestly believes that there are fans who fish octopi out of the Detroit and them lob then on to the ice at the Joe. That's definitely a laugher.

Home ice advantage is nearly irrelevant in hockey.

I’m sorry pal, but there’s no way he was serious. Come on…you don’t honestly believe that Hull truly thinks that fans fish octopi out of the Detroit River and then take them inside and lob them onto the ice, do you? Give the guy a little credit. Sheesh.

The only good thing about the comments we see when the Wings were down is the fact that, occasionally, they blow up in the speaker's face in spectacular fashion, just like this thread did. That actually almost makes it worthwhile.

Here we go again with this crap. You see it everytime the wings fall behind. "They don't want it." "They're getting outworked." "They have no heart." It's juvenile. Just because the Wings are losing doesn't automatically mean that "they don't want it." Just because they make some mistakes doesn't mean "they don't want to win." Of course they want to f*cking win! And they proved it by coming back and winning. But even if they didn't finish off the comeback, it doesn't mean they don't want to win. Simplistic knee-jerk reactions like that are really irritating, and they're all over the place on this forum when the Wings aren't winning.

Care to make any revisions to that post?

You know he meant the Detroit area. As far as Hull's comment, it was obviously a joke.

Sports are useful because they can provide us with a momentary escape from certain sobering realities of life, like war, famine, disease, catastrophes, bills, taxes, worrying about loved ones, stresses of our jobs, etc.

I love it when yankees fans cite A-Rod's salary as the cause of their disdain: "For $25 million, we expect more of him." But here's the thing: does anybody honestly believe that A-Rod's contract is stopping The Boss from spending money on any other part of that team? They essentially have a limitless purse to work with. Their owner will spare no expense. I think he just forgot that pitching, not hitting, was the biggest reason they ran the late 90s. But hey, if they wanna trade A-Rod for Inge, Cashman knows Dombrowski's number.

This is clearly a stand-alone topic. Are we only supposed to have one thread per sport in here?

Oh come on mods. That's weak

Mr. April is having the greatest April in baseball history, and what have the Yankees done with it: 8-11, good for LAST PLACE in the east. If A-Rod keeps up his current pace (.385, 119 HRs, 290 RBI) and the Yankees still don't make the playoffs, will Yankees fans still find a way to blame it on A-Rod?

Memo to Rob: Hank isn't the only legend attempting to distance himself from Bonds. In fact, there are a number of legends who have blatantly ripped Bonds verbally.

After the wings lost game 4, there were droves of Wings fans ripping the team's effort, predicting the Wings' demise in this series, etc. Why? Because they had just lost the second one-goal game on the road to one of the toughest home teams the NHL had this season. It was completely irrational and completely unjustified. Are you all embarassed for yourselves now? The Wings completely smothered the Flames in games one two, then they lost two very close, very hotly contested games on the road to a very good home team. The balance of the series was still in favor of Detroit. And after games 5 and 6, there is absolutely no doubt that Detroit was far better than Calgary. But hockey is a flukey sport. A bounce of the puck here or there can make such a drastic difference in the outcome of a game, and that confuses fans. After a loss, you get fans coming on here pushing the usual, tired cliches: they didn't want it badly enough; they're getting 'outworked'; they're getting outplayed; they have no heart; they're not tough enough; etc. and so forth. It's ridiculous. With a bounce of the puck this way or that, the score after game 4 of the series could have been 4-0 in favor of Detroit just as easily as it was 2-2. Those were close games. A couple breaks our way, and we could have won either one of them or both. But I said it after game 4: there are a ton of fickle Wings fans. They'll jump off the bandwagon at the first hint of adversity.

For those of you who have criticized me for starting this thread because you think I'm being smug, or trying to rub people's noses in it, essentially saying "I told you so," you're missing my point. I'm not trying to say "I told you so," because the Wings could have easily lost this series. And they could easily lose the next series. In fact, I don't think they're going to win the Stanley Cup this year. I'm not saying that games 5 and 6 prove me right. My point is this: to come on here and say that the Wings lost because "they didn't want it" or "they didn't work hard enough" or "they had no heart" is such clichéd knee-jerky nonsense. The Wings effort was high throughout the series. They didn't lose games 3 or 4 because of lack of effort. For that matter, they didn't lose to the Oilers last year, the Flames the playoff before that, and the Ducks the year before that because of a "lack of effort" or "not wanting it enough." People who automatically resort to those clichés after a loss don't understand hockey, IMO. Sometimes the better team doesn't get rewarded in hockey. It's a flukey sport at times and things like a hot goaltender and some bad breaks can equalize things for lesser teams, with or without a difference in effort. I'm not saying "don't criticize your team." I'm not saying that you're not a real fan unless you are blindly optimistic at all times. What I'm saying is that not every loss is due to lack of effort, lack of heart, lack of hunger, etc. So to come on here and automatically resort to what essentially amounts to calling the Red Wings a bunch of girls is ridiculous. And there was a lot of that stuff going on after game 4. Also, a lot of fans are fickle. After games 1 and 2, the Wings could do no wrong. Then they go on the road against a very good home team and lose two very close games by one goal each (in a sport that has a small margin of error to begin with) and all of a sudden, we had an array of Wings fans that needed to be talked down from the ledge. It was embarrassing.

That's kind of a strawman argument you're making, because I don't think anybody is really saying that you're not a fan, that you don't root for the Wings, that you don't want them to win. And your comparisons about the Lions and 2003 Tigers aren't good analogies, because a lot of what we saw after games 3 and 4 wasn't objective analysis, but brazen irrationality and knee-jerkyness. There were people on here acting like the Wings got absolutely smothered (which they didn't) and essentially questioned the manhood and character of the team, after two tough, close losses on the road to a good home team. It was completely unjustified.