betterREDthandead

Yes, yes, yes, and sort of. Didn't you know that's what I do? I thought I'd broadcast it pretty far and wide by now Yeah, we're going to San Diego and that area of the ocean for about five weeks. Everett, which is where we're based, is a much smaller base and doesn't have all the facilities and services, so Everett ships periodically head to San Diego for about a month to get various things done that can't be done up here.

Unfortunately I won't be watching the next five races. My ship is getting underway this week and we won't be back for quite a while. I'll miss Bristol. I don't plan on picking a favorite driver 'til I watch enough races. I'm sure something will present itself. In the past I've just kind of hoped a good sponsor won. Beer, liquor, gasoline, automotive, hardware stores, military - good. Cell phones, mortgage companies, pharmaceuticals, candy - not so much. Can you imagine Dale Earnhardt driving, say, the M&M's car???? Or the Cingular car? Or, heaven forbid, the Viagra car that Mark Martin drove for a couple years? These days, of course, there's Toyota to boo. And it's a shame, because I noticed the Valvoline car is a Toyota, as well as the Caterpillar car. (Which come to think of it, I think was the one that ended up zorching down pit row. Ha.) BTW, I probably still have the Mello Yello toy car from a Hardee's kids meal when they were doing a Days of Thunder promotion that one was cool. But probably one of my favorites from whenever was the Tide car. I dug that one. Weird.

Great, Michigan State pulls off the upset of the year in the Big Ten which will lead to Ohio State being #1 in the country in both polls. Is this a great year to be a Michigan fan or what??? Thank God for Virginia and the ACC (and more specifically, for Sean Singletary) or I'd go nuts.

OK, well, I'm about to display severe n00bishness here, because I'm sure this question has been asked a zillion times, but Indy cars have no problems going that fast, so why NASCAR cars? The Brickyard even has turns that aren't anywhere near as banked as those at Daytona. If NASCAR vehicles can hit speeds of 235 at Talladega, why don't they even come close to that when they race Indy? Are open-wheel cars really that much more stable? Are they wider? Pardon my incessant flow of questions, but I really don't know the nuances of racing, only the basics. And it would appear I've already made the decision to actually follow NASCAR, since I looked at the upcoming schedule and subconsciously (and happily) noted that I won't miss as many races as I thought I would due to being away from home for five weeks, starting shortly. So I guess I should try to know what I'm talking about.

Makes you wonder if NASCAR likes it that way. Puttin' on the tinfoil hat here. Daytona and Talladega, the two tracks where the most people are likely to be watching, and what does the casual NASCAR fan like the most? Big piles of cars going every which way but forward, of course. I'm guilty as charged same as everyone. NASCAR's got fancy walls, a mandatory head-restraint system, and the supposedly dazzlingly safe Car of Tomorrow - their butts are covered - so why not please the masses with a technology that guarantees spectacular crashes on the biggest stage?

True, but it's pretty well known that Hasek is a very stereotypical moody eccentric and obsessive-compulsive goalie type, and doesn't like people fussing with his crease, water bottle, etc.

No doubt that's to make deflections easier. Holmstrom probably hasn't unleashed a slap shot since the Clinton era.

Because there's an ocean in the way.

Now that you explain it, I agree with most of it.....the lucky dog rule sounds stupid and overly complex. Racing back to the line would only make sense, since the pace car comes out from pit row just ahead of the line anyway. I guess people behind the wreck shouldn't be racing past it though. I was thinking during the race that they ought to have a speed lane in pit row where there is no speed limit, well away from the pits themselves. I wouldn't want to see them get rid of the speed limit entirely though. I always figured part of the reason they had a speed limit was so drivers don't shortcut. Now, I did think it was hilarious, during the race, when one driver (forget who) was forced to go down pit row to avoid a wreck, and blew a tire without knowing it. The image of a guy screaming down pit row and coming straight back out into the middle of the pack and taking another vehicle to the wall is a lasting impression of the chaos of those last 45 laps. Did he get penalized for that? Oh, and one other question: I know they've got some races where restrictor plates are required, and some not. What's the difference?

Agreed, as well they shouldn't. I'd trade five Hudlers for Corey Perry. HUGE part of the Ducks' future.

You'll have to explain some of those to me cause I haven't the faintest idea what all those mean. Especially about pit road on a caution.....I see EVERYONE going to town on pit road during cautions. Oh....and I love the fact that they didn't throw the caution for that last wreck. That last lap is going to make me a NASCAR fan yet. Absolutely thrilling finish. In that moment, you had almost everything that's great about racing all wrapped up in one: thrilling photo finish, massive pileup behind, and nobody got hurt. Cars all skidding across the line upside down. Great stuff. That's certainly a race I'll never forget. NASCAR was in a huge no-win with that one, because had they knee-jerked a yellow flag, they'd have had people howling to let 'em race, that the wreck had no bearing on the finish between Martin and Harvick, that they're ruining NASCAR with all these namby-pamby cautions, etc. People might cry safety and say they were risking the drivers by not throwing the caution, but I don't buy it - I believe they threw yellow as soon as the race was decided for Harvick. Any earlier, and it wouldn't have had an effect on safety, as cars were still skidding and crashing and it would have been too soon for other drivers to react and slow down. And the rest of us can't understand why policemen get killed over soccer riots. So you'll forgive me if I don't give a s*** what the world thinks of American sporting tastes. Formula One gets great popularity in Europe because most of the races are in Europe. P.S.: F**k no. If you love European stuff so much, move there.

Thank god you're not Holland then.

I propose a rules change. Instead of dropping just three weeks from our score, let's all drop twelve. That way I can stay competitive

No, that's kind of what I meant.....if we trade for Bert, and he's unavailable to us - i.e., he's too hurt to play and then signs somewhere else in the summer, that would be the conditions under which we get a pick, in my fantasyland. That way it's a pick for Hudler, at least from our end. Still a gamble, but if Bertuzzi's really hurt, and we give up Hudler anyway.....well, Florida wasn't going to get anything at all for him in that case. So they get Hudler, we get a crack at Bertuzzi, and a pick goes in whichever direction it needs to in order to make up for whoever takes the hit.

Eklund is saying the same thing. Similar looking to the Forsberg deal, I am thinking. I'll give Eklund this: he seems to be usually right the day of. Any other time, he's throwing darts. If indeed it's SJ, here's my prediction as to the price: Matt Carle, prospect, and a 2nd.

Unfortunately we can't really be choosy. Big-ass gritty scoring wingers are not exactly the easiest type of player to find, so when one comes available, you can't say "no, I want a different big-ass gritty scoring winger." No, Bertuzzi's not ideal, but he's the type we want, and Hudler was voted Most Likely To Fold Like Origami In The Playoffs for his high school yearbook (he's EXACTLY the type to get pushed around and disappear) so if Bertuzzi's healthy, it's the move to make. If Holland is really good he could play it like this: Put up a big stinky fuss about what a terrific talent Hudler is and how it's soooooo risky to trade that amazing talent away for a guy coming off back surgery that we can't even see play, and convince Florida to send a draft pick our way if Bertuzzi's not healthy enough for the playoffs. And offer a conditional pick if Bertuzzi re-signs with us.

I'm no expert on sticks, but.....it looks like it's hardly curved at all is that the point?

Til there's a non-Eklund link involved, it's a Rumor Mill. Will be moved back to GD upon confirmation.

I'm with Lou. Williams is fast approaching Lilja status and that's not deserved. It's getting ridiculous - almost totally irrational. Bulls***. Williams had 58 points last season and has been good enough to see time with the Wings since 2001. More like, one bad half season and all of a sudden he's garbage. Give it a rest.

It's really brilliant how "thickheaded and ignorant" means "disagrees with me" in Mudvaynespeak. I said we could argue this til the break of dawn, and apparently, I was right, despite taking a seven hour break for actually getting some sleep. I guess if you're clearly in the minority on something, the whole rest of the world is thickheaded. Bet that kind of tactic won you all sorts of medals on debate team

Actually, that's precisely the reason Heatley didn't serve any jail time. So it does matter.

We can sit here all night and all day tomorrow discussing the minute details of just exactly how Moore ended up on the ice. It's been done. What I have no doubt about is this: I don't believe, and I don't see how anyone can believe, that Bertuzzi ever thought to himself, "OK, that Steve Moore, he's a punk, and I'm gonna end his career right here and now. Gonna break his neck. Try and paralyze him. When I'm through with him he'll never play hockey again." That's ridiculous. As for the cameraman knowing Rogers didn't want to be filmed, great. Moore was no innocent puppy dog either. Again, we can go back and forth all night about who brought what upon themselves. It's irrelevant.

Keep in mind, if you've seen the videos of both, Bertuzzi hit Moore once and tackled him. Whether or not Moore's neck was broken by that blow or the weight of several other players piling on top has always been up for debate. Whereas Kenny went after the cameraman, not once, not twice....multiple times. After it appeared the incident was over, he did it again. If Moore hadn't landed awkwardly or other players landed awkwardly on top of him, we wouldn't be talking about this. The result skews the perception. In no way am I defending what Bertuzzi did, but I don't see how the intent between Kenny and Bertuzzi was any different. Both were pissed. Both committed a very public act of assault. Suppose Kenny had done nothing different in repeatedly shoving the cameraman, and the cameraman had gone over a railing into the dugout, breaking his neck in the process, instead of falling to the grass?

I would put more weight into it if it was a national writer and not a Panthers beat writer, who is probably a smidge biased. And if Bertuzzi gets into the lineup Saturday, well, the deadline isn't til the following Tuesday, so there will still be evaluation time.

I don't care what the end result was, Rogers, Sheed, and Bertuzzi all did basically the same thing. They let their tempers get the better of them and they attacked someone who pissed them off. Sheed nearly came to blows with a ref on a loading ramp. Rogers assaulted a cameraman. Bertuzzi sucker-punched Steve Moore. Cheli, for all we can guess, was as likely as anyone to have been the one to chuck hotel furniture out the window in Nagano. Whatever the end result, I consider them more or less the same. All of them committed the same sin of letting their rage get the best of them. That the cameraman got a check out of it has absolutely nothing to do with this. Sheed and Kenny had reputations that were completely in the dumpster before they got here, and since then, they've had a renaissance. Bertuzzi can be the same way.