SouthernWingsFan

It wouldn't affect my viewing one way or the other. The NHL needs to get rid of the instigating rule though, then you might see more run-of-the-mill fights. It certainly has it's place in the game, along with plenty of other aspects which make the sport great to play or watch. And while I don't mind seeing people drop the gloves, I'm not drooling in my seat yelling for a bout or going like a monkey "OOOH OOOH OOOH A FIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YIPPEE!" If it happens, great, if not there's other parts of the game to enjoy. It's just overhyped in here I think.

Unless he returns to the Wings, I say nay. And I'm not expecting him to return to the Wings either (no confirmations/soruces etc., just my gut opinion).

Offense: 4 Defense: 4 Goaltending: 4 Physicality: 3 Powerplay: 3 Penaltykilling: 5 Clutch: 4 Coaching: 4

And what should it say about these people? That they are idiots for watching ESPN, perhaps just to tune into a football or basketball game, and not really caring about the other things on the network? That these people are idiots because they don’t tune into hockey as much or watch hockey at all? That these people are somehow being brainwashed in a conspiracy by ESPN? For people that might not hate ESPN to the degree of some people in here, such as yourself, what does that say about them then? Look, there’s no denying a decent ESPN to MTV reference, I can go with that to a large extent, but let’s be serious here. Even when they showed hockey, how many of you put as much time or dedication of watching ESPN outside of hockey coverage or NHL2Night? I’m betting not a lot, and I can bet not as much effort as people put in now to find every single little thing that might be wrong with the network, largely just because they don’t show hockey. Am I far off on this assumption? You could easily have done that for Fox Sports Net Detroit or TSN or other local sports stations if you live north of the border for highlights, more local commentary, and such. I’m no ESPN representative or slappie, I could really care less about many of the talk shows, continuous commentary and the like, all I really watch it for are live games and post-game highlights. It’s not that I hate the other shows, I just don’t care to watch them one way or the other. ESPN serves my purposes just fine right now, I don’t need more from them and don't watch them more than necessary. I’m not high maintenance, I just want to see the game, maybe a highlight here or there, and I’ll read articles/news on the Internet later. Now I know some people are looking for more when it comes to watching sports and the like, but you and everybody else knows that a lot people in here are ridiculously overdramatic about their rants about the network and don't provide any, or any good, logic or reasoning why (not including this thread which is actually pretty decent). I don’t care that badly to try to watch or get angry about the ESPN material that might be more "MTV like". It’s not worth my time or energy. While there’s no denying the jabs on hockey every now and then, to think that there is a network or large presence out there to ruin the sport is also being overdramatic and ludicrous. We all need to get this through our heads and accept the obvious. While most or all of us might consider hockey king, the large majority of people in the U.S. do not, and will not anytime soon. These people don’t understand the sport for better or worse, and they don’t want to take the time to try to understand it because either they just don’t want to, or are too busy with work or personal life, or whatever else. Again, MANY PEOPLE IN THE UNITED STATES DON’T CONSIDER HOCKEY #1 OR DON’T UNDERSTAND THE SPORT, which will probably result in people having an initial unfavorable opinion of the game. It may not be good or "right", but it is what it is. Let these people alone and quit wasting energy getting mad at these people. There’s nothing wrong with that as the game isn’t going away anytime soon. If they don’t like it and don’t want to watch, who cares? It’s their loss. You and I like it most, we think it’s good, we are going to watch it regardless of general public opinion, it’s not going to disappear anytime soon despite the frequent BETTMAN IS THE WORST THING SINCE DESERT SAND comments, so why don’t we just enjoy watching it, instead of focusing on all the negatives that we have no control over? Can ESPN improve themselves? Without question. Are they as bad as dramatized in here every 3 days? Not even close.

No "big" (or bad in this case/most cases) is good news to me. I might be in the minority, but could care less about drama or entertainment in sports off the playing surface. Just do your job in practice and in the games, and go about your business quietly...

Martha Vandellas - Dancing in the Streets

Nah, 26. I tore my ACL/MCL playing pickup basketball in college so any sports are out of the question. *shrugs*

Nobody's certainly forcing you to come on here....

Your next cup of coffee is going to be decaf...

I could list some more things in showing a know the sport a little bit, since you acknowledged my witty attempt. A double minor penalty is 4:00, often the result of a high sticking penalty where a player gets cut on the face. There are plenty of common penalties in hockey, such as hooking, interference, goalie interference, high sticking, cross checking, slashing, and tripping. There are a few variety of ways to shoot a puck, including a slap shot, wrist shot, snap shot, and backhander. The goalie crease area is usually blue (hey had to throw a "cute" and witty smart-ass reference in there ) Icing occurs when a player in possession with the puck behind the center ice line shoots it down the ice and it goes past the goal line behind the net, preventing the opposing team from realistically playing the puck. A professional game at least consists of 3 20-minute periods. A one-timer results from the receiver of a pass immediately shooting the puck while it was still in motion. I could list some more for ya if you want. Hopefully this proves that even though I don't play hockey, I've seen enough of it to show that I can discuss with people that have played it and have "high standards" about discussing it with people who don't play the sport. But, it could just serve as another cute and witty post with gibberish where you will only take the time to selectively read what you want.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?p...reenshots070824 I know I know, the division still isn't all that strong, but good to see people giving kudos to them.

Well it is baseball season...

He's played a big part in the involvement of treating them inhumanely though and killing the ones that have "failed" in action. I don't know how long this has been "illegal", but I'm sure it's been for a while. Now, I haven't followed the case and updates to a T, I don't care that badly about it, but if he's taken a big part in killing living things (I know I know, don't step on a fly or roach then....), that seems like a pretty serious offense.

I usually just watch sports network channels to watch live game action, and maybe highlights. Commentary and other shows are secondary to me. Now, I understand people's bias, TO AN EXTENT, against it b/c they don't show hockey, but whenever ESPN is mentioned in here, usually the negativitiy towards them goes way overboard or it's just, "ESPN DOESN'T SHOW HOCKEY?!?!?!?! THAT SUX AND THEY SUCK OH MY FRICKEN GOD!!!!!!!!!", without any legitimate reasoning. And for those who whine and complain that they show Poker or Spelling Bee tournaments over hockey, you know that a lot of those programs come on during the morning or middle of the day, when hockey has never been shown during the weekdays, even when it was on ESPN or ABC? It's a business. They cater to the American public and what the American public wants to see. And, I know this is a hard pill for some in here to swallow, but a lot of the general American public doesn't want to see hockey as a first choice. ESPN makes money by showing programs and sporting events that they think the general American public will watch, and get as much market share as possible. They don't focus on one/a few particular groups of fans when it comes to a particular sport. That's how they make their money. I got nothing against ESPN whatsoever. I could care less what station hockey games are played on, as long as they are on somewhere. They could be on the Family Channel for all I care, I just want see the game action. The Little League World Series is going on right now. They show it every year. Care to give some more detail/insight outside a 1-liner of why don't you like ESPN?

Maceo Parker - Southwick

Meh, I think they're all the same.

You have FORGOTTEN about hockey? Ah, the old "I know more about you comment" since I've played, or FORGOTTEN in this case, about hockey and you haven't. And nope, I've never played hockey because there's no ice down here. You want to supply some from up north? I'd appreciate it! I guess because I've never played hockey, I know so little about it. Let's see, the game starts at center ice with a face-off. The puck has to be the first object across the blue line or it's offside. The team that scores the most goals wins the game. A minor penalty is worth 2:00, a major penalty is worth 5:00. Yep, I know or have FORGOTTEN some things about this game, probably just as much as you know and have FORGOTTEN about this game!

LGWer Jamie.

Insert the 7523rd LGW overdramatic rant about how Chris Pronger is a dips**t HERE.

You are also being just as "subjective" as that last poster, and as "subjective" as I am going to be, and as "subjective" as the people who acutally vote for the Conn Smythe trophy. While nobody is denying Yzerman's huge importance to the playoffs in 2002, especially in that first round where he was the Wings best player, Lidstrom was the most consistent player/performer THROUGHOUT THE PLAYOFFS, hence why he probably won the Conn Smythe.

Maybe he actually considers things in hockey OTHER THAN fighting. You know, like good goaltending, having a few good scorers, decent coaching, etc. That kinda makes for some decent hockey acumen and knowledge as well, not just knowing ONLY fighting and being so closed-minded about other things. Just because other posters put pretty good emphasis on other parts of the game you may not like as much, while not considering fighting s much, doesn't make them stupid. You just sound ignorant and closed-minded. Well dang gum it, you caught me... /end sarcasm

Sheesh he made a mistake, lighten up a bit. Anyways, #82 is kind of a cool number, but Kopecky should've just gone completely out of the box and wore a fraction or an equation or a letter of the greek alpha bet, like 5/16 or (PI)(r-squared) or Theta.

That's the only way to do it for me. I've pretty much grown out of eating anything at any fast food restaurants, probably no more than once a month if that, so that's all but gone from my diet. I'm smart enough to not stuff my face with fried chicken or burgers every day, so for the most part I watch what I eat, even though I might not eat as much things that "taste good". I'd go miserable though if I went on a "strict" diet with all kinds of rules that I don't make up or have control over. I made a boo-boo Sunday though. I ate a pretty big chicken salad sandwich, but felt like having a lazy day that day, and my weight went up a good bit in a short time. But, it's slowly fizzling back down to the mid-140s like I want. And I also extended the planned 25 mile bike ride to 30, although that was aided by having to take shelter from lightning for about a half hour. So, I had some 'saved' energy. During weekdays, I'm now trying to run or do cario-related workouts twice a day now. Killing every calorie helps after eating a meal. I run treadmill most early mornings before work for about 2 - 2 1/2 miles, and I'm trying to run around that length immediately after work outdoors, pending time and if I have to run errands or got work-related functions in the evening. It's hard because it's a hot fother mucker out here, but I'm trying to keep up the mental/physical discipline to do this.

I can't wait to attend my alma mater's game at Texas on September 8th. TCU I tihnk has an outside chance of winning, especially with the defense they have. Also, remember we upset #7 Oklahoma at their den in 2005. But I'm going to be realistic and not be a TCU homer and trash talk and say we "should" win. That's silly. Even though we are ranked right now, going on the road against a top-5 team is a wee bit difficult. I'll go bonkers if we win, but if we lose and keep the margin to 2 TDs or less being competitive (i.e. not losing 14-0 and generating some offense), I'll be happy. I'm betting UT will proabably be about a 14-20 point favorite.

I haven't read the previous pages of the thread, but I do not understand anybody trying to defend Vick's actions right now, where everything points to him having a high level of involvement in all this crap. He took part in treating animals inhumanely and killing LIVING THINGS (and please let's not get into, well insects/bugs are living things, don't swat a fly etc. etc. etc.). What's to defend there? Now, with that being said, even though I may not like it and it would probably be a PR nighhtmare, I think it's fair that Vick would get the chance to play in the NFL again, IF AND ONLY IF he completes whatever jail sentences he gets served on him and any suspensions that might result from the NFL itself. In that general sense, Vick should be treated no differently than another inmmate recently released and trying to look for work again (hopefully). It's not that simple, but you get what I'm saying I hope... All I am looking for in this whole drama is for fair justice to be served. After that, Vick could do whatever he wants for all I care, whether it's play in the NFL again, the Candian Football League, etc.