-
Content Count
3,495 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Calendar
Articles
Store
Downloads
Member Map
Everything posted by betterREDthandead
-
Eh, we all know how the little brother can get overenthusiastic sometimes. I mean, it's their first win over Michigan in a 60-minutes-and-zero-seconds game since the Saban era.
-
How nice of him. It'd be rude not to leave a present in return.
-
Oh we say both. Believe me. Marcus more than Michael. At least Michael waited until he got to the NFL to stupidly throw his career away.
-
It's a very versatile sheet of paper I shouldn't really make fun since I didn't actually go to Michigan and thus ought to limit myself to football jokes, but I'm just reusing the ones I have for VT (which - take this as you will - cannot hold a candle to MSU academically.)
-
-
Friday: Anaheim @ Ottawa Philadelphia @ New Jersey NY Rangers @ Columbus San Jose @ Florida Atlanta @ Detroit Los Angeles @ St Louis Saturday: New Jersey @ Philadelphia Atlanta @ Boston Ottawa @ Toronto Anaheim @ Montreal Carolina @ NY Islanders Pittsburgh @ NY Rangers San Jose @ Tampa Bay Los Angeles @ Nashville Columbus @ Minnesota Washington @ Dallas Detroit @ Chicago Florida @ St Louis Buffalo @ Colorado Edmonton @ Vancouver Calgary @ Phoenix
-
Ah, but what if you don't win? What kind of effect would that have on the psyche of Sparty fans? I mean, this is the year, right? But MSU and Wisconsin are the same kind of team. All Ringer and Hill and no quarterback. I'd think MSU should be more scared of losing this year than most other years. It's less likely, but way more damaging. For good measure: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6PUl7tJZkc...feature=related
-
Which I think makes him a great candidate to be gone. Losing him means compensation, losing anyone else means none. Holland can make an "effort" to keep him and let him walk to another team. He's got the skills but I think he's replaceable especially if not re-signing him means more room for keeping Hossa.
-
Time to dig this bad boy up from the dead. I'm a little over halfway through Les Misérables right now and thoroughly enjoying it for several reasons: - I've always loved Dickens and this is right up the same alley. - I finally found a book that is a match for my voraciously fast reading. I read really quickly, it was a blessing in school but it's a curse whenever I want to read a book for enjoyment because I have to force myself to put it away otherwise it takes far too little time and I'm done before I know it. Example: One summer when I had nothing better to do, I blasted through Dune in about three days. I knocked out the last three-quarters of Deathly Hallows in about five hours. I wanted to put that away so I could at least enjoy it for three days but couldn't help myself. - I wish I could have studied this book in high school English, although it's a bit long for that. When Hugo wants you to understand some bit of symbolism or what a character is like, he bludgeons you over the head with descriptions. It wouldn't take any work at all to write a paper on this stuff. It gets a little annoying sometimes because he describes to you exactly what every character is all about and takes like two or three pages doing it. Little Gavroche gets six, and this is a slightly abridged version. So you get a really good picture, which is nice, but on the other hand I could pretty well have formed my own opinion of the characters through their actions, because when Hugo isn't writing essays about characters and settings he's giving them interesting things to do. - Hugo can write a sentence that takes up half a page and follow it up with one of just a few words and they're both equally descriptive. I got this book over a week ago and it'll probably take me another week at least to finish, which is nice. I can't remember the last time I spent two weeks on a book I liked.
-
The Official 2008 Detroit Lions Thread
betterREDthandead replied to timothy1997's topic in Other Sports
So apparently Brett Favre called up the Lions on his own initiative and tipped them off as to things that the Packers do on offense? Assuming that story is true, why? And why do we suck so bad we give up 48 points when we know what's friggin' coming? -
I was pulling for the Brew Crew against Philly (and the Cubs against the Dodgers), but once the ALCS and NLCS were set, the Phillies were easily my favorite of the four teams remaining. The Phillies are definitely deserving of a championship, it's been, what, almost thirty years? So go Phillies!
-
1. Offensive line figured out what run-blocking is, and Big Canada, Austin Pasztor replaced ineffective Zak Stair. 2. Marc Verica is a better quarterback than Peter Lalich - extremely accurate thrower. Watch for him in the coming years as he is only a sophomore. 3. Cedric Peerman is healthy again. 4. Homestand - we are notoriously s***ty on the road and much better than average at home; always have been.
-
I dunno, I'm pretty happy. I had to pick which game I was gonna watch and I chose the one more likely to end up a win - and I ended up right. UVA had a streak to defend today and did so in very dramatic fashion. The bowl streak is done, so there's only two games I'm gonna stress over any more in Michigan's season.
-
Amen to that. Anyone ever been to a Canucks game in Vancouver? If you knew nothing about the Canucks' history you'd think there was a tournament in the house instead of a single game. Jerseys of white, blue, navy, maroon, red, yellow, green, and that's not even counting the Flames fans in the house. That's what you get when you have this mentality that you need to add new looks. The Wings, I'm sure, will never change from red, but why would we want to act like other teams?
-
No. How many times do I have to say that? What about the guy who was first in points - why not him? What about Syd Howe, who retired as the actual leader in all those categories? You shuffle him off afterwards, "maybe you can take a look at him." Why is it that retiring third in assists and second in points better to you than retiring #1 in each as Howe did? Or maybe the Senators should retire Radek Bonk's number? What you say here about Aurie, you can say much the same about Bonk when he left the Sens. Franchise leader in games played, etc. Why are you so impressed by the achievements of one or two years? When did a couple years become enough to honor a player with the highest of honors? You keep harping on him leading the league in playoff scoring. Once. How many times do I have to tell you this is not impressive? Go back and see why I think Fedorov's number should not be retired and see if I ever mentioned "qualities" or any such thing. Do not claim the NHL then is the same quality it is now. Don't even pretend. You yourself said it was a lower-scoring era, did you ever stop to think why that was? Ridiculous. Are you claiming that Larry Aurie is the Michael Phelps of swimming? In other words, the best hockey player ever? You once cited the Hockey News top 100 in your case for Red Kelly, so you seem to value their rankings. Where does Aurie stand in the top 100? From all accounts Kris Draper has it in spades, too, and he's played more seasons than Aurie did. From all accounts Tomas Holmstrom has it in spades too, and he's played more seasons than Aurie did AND has similar PPG stats, both playoffs and regular season. Precisely.
-
Fine, if we're only going to include "Red Wings" history and not when they were the Falcons or Cougars, then we absolutely should not retire the number of a guy who played only six years for the Wings. But that's kind of silly, because the Falcons and Cougars are also the Wings the same as the Washington Bullets are the Washington Wizards. So the point you make here is equally useless. Since when are the Blues comparable to the Wings? I'm not at all willing to use other teams' number retirement standards for the Wings. A leader of the team. Helped lead the team. It's exactly as I said. What did Aurie do to stand out from the crowd, either in the league or on his own team? Doug Young was the captain of the team that won that Cup. Marty Barry led the team in regular season scoring and John Sorrell led the team in the playoffs. Mud Bruneteau scored the famous goal to end the longest playoff game in history, and Ebbie Goodfellow was a second-team All Star, the only Wing representing. What did Aurie do to stand out? What nonsense. You're taking my argument off into the clouds. It is always more impressive to win a competition against large numbers of competitors than small numbers. Think about what you're saying - and if you're going to use a flimsy argument like that, know what you're going against. Sid Abel made four All-Star teams - 2 first teams and 2 seconds. Ted Lindsay made 8 first teams. Gordie Howe made 12. That's dominance. Aurie made 1. That's not dominance. Yzerman and Fedorov made one each, and again, against 25-30 teams worth of players instead of 6 or 8. If in 40 years, the NHL is three times the size, with 90 teams and nearly 2000 players, then yes - any player who can maintain dominance against that much larger talent pool would be much more impressive than Yzerman. First off you listed one season twice. He had one season where he led the league in goals and placed in the top four scoring. In one other season - just one - he was 3rd. Not runner up as you claim. That makes two. That is nothing even close to "top 5 in points several times" as you originally said. During Aurie's Wings career he was top five in the league in points twice - a claim that 14 other players can make during that exact time period - 7 of whom beat that number. You can word Aurie's scoring accomplishments however you like, but this can't be escaped: Aurie was nowhere near the pre-eminent scorer even on his own team. Howe, Lewis, Goodfellow (a defenseman), Marty Barry while he was a Wing....quite a number of players better than Aurie at this. So he had a total of three seasons where he did something noteworthy. Three. You can reword his accomplishments all you want, but you can't reword it so that they stand out above other Wings of the time like Herbie Lewis, Syd Howe, Ebbie Goodfellow. The numbers currently hanging in the rafters were worn by players who stood above the entire league, let alone their own team. They were the preeminent players of their day. Aurie cannot make that claim.
-
Breaking it down... Which are we going to give him credit for, being on a bad team or a good one? A lot of players excelled for bad Red Wings teams, it's nothing special. And by what standard did he lead the organization to the first Cup? He wasn't the captain. He didn't lead the team in scoring that year, nor games played, and was tied for 11th out of 14 in team playoff scoring. The league was barely one-fourth the size and teams were maybe half the size. I'm not really impressed by this stat because of the greatly increased talent pool Yzerman and Fedorov had to contend with. It's an unfair comparison, and incredibly misleading, given that the correct answer for all three is "once." That doesn't make Aurie a pre-eminent forward of his day, since Aurie was competing with probably about 60-80 players and Yzerman and Fedorov with well over 300. (Yes, different poster, I know, but same line of argument.) This sort of accomplishment did not get Syd Howe's number retired. If by "several" you mean "twice". I'll tell you, then. He was a good, not great, player of his time. He only truly had four seasons of really notable play, and seven seasons of playing decently but not greatly. He led the Wings in scoring only twice during those four years of good play. Of the Wings of that era I would say he's overshadowed at least by Syd Howe and Ebbie Goodfellow, and he was absolutely nowhere near to being "one of the top forwards of his era," as you claim. Howie Morenz, Bill Cook, Cecil Dillon, Syd Howe, Marty Barry, Dit Clapper, Auriel Joliat, Busher Jackson, Joe Primeau, Marty Conacher, Frank Boucher.....the list goes on. When talking about the best forwards of the era Aurie doesn't at all stack up. What is it that does not make his number retirement worthy? Because in no way did he stand clearly head and shoulders above his contemporaries. He was one of a parade of good players. Aurie was not Steve Yzerman or even Sergei Fedorov. He was Slava Kozlov with a fighting streak.
-
Then I would be angry because Yzerman deserves to have his number retired. Not because "what's done can't be undone" so to speak. In other words, the mere fact that someone retired it doesn't by itself make it worthy of retirement.
-
I don't see how the same boring style of hockey is more exciting with more goals - it's just more stoppages in play. Exciting hockey is back and forth action without any icings, offsides, or any such sloppy junk. 5-4 is not automatically more exciting than 1-0. Enlarging the nets would just encourage teams to play the same boring brand of hockey.
-
Wouldn't help anyone, either. And it also wouldn't hurt not to have a third. Every new jersey is an opportunity to screw things up. And what would it improve? How can you improve on perfection?
-
Then again, the Norris family did not see fit to retire numbers like, say, Sid Abel. Why should the decision not to retire Abel and Delvecchio be reversible and this not?
-
Friday: Phoenix @ Ottawa Toronto @ NY Rangers Nashville @ Columbus Vancouver @ Buffalo Edmonton @ Calgary San Jose @ Anaheim Carolina @ Los Angeles Saturday: Colorado @ Dallas Phoenix @ Montreal Boston @ Ottawa Toronto @ Pittsburgh New Jersey @ Washington Buffalo @ Atlanta NY Islanders @ Florida NY Rangers @ Detroit Minnesota @ Tampa Bay Columbus @ Nashville Chicago @ St Louis Calgary @ Edmonton Philadelphia @ San Jose Sunday: Vancouver @ Chicago Carolina @ Anaheim
-
Every game you wear the stupid third is a game you don't wear the classics. What's the point to a third jersey? So we can be like all the cool kids? Who don't have Stanley Cups, but they do have an INTIMIDATING BLACK JERSEY. What on earth do we need with a black jersey, or any third at all?
-
Agreed....but why does it have to be in the form of a retired number? I think people have this notion that if the number isn't retired, then the player remains 100% unhonored and forgotten. Fedorov can be honored in other ways, like, isn't there a Hall of Fame in the Joe with plaques and such? Retiring a number should IMO be the absolute pinnacle of honor. It's not as if you either retire the number or forget the guy entirely.
-
I've always thought there might be the possibility that there's a really, really good reason Aurie's number isn't hanging and that the Ilitches are keeping it quiet so as not to tarnish Aurie's legacy and taking the blame as the bad guys for the sake of the family. That's real, real slim, but you never know. Anyway, I wouldn't want to see Aurie's number hung in the rafters. I think there were players more deserving from that era. Of the six numbers (seven with #6) Aurie would be far, far away the weakest one, and really nobody would consider it worth retiring if it hadn't been sort of done once upon a time. Nobody crusades for Ebbie Goodfellow, for example.