aarond 0 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 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. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Winged Scooter 0 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 (edited) 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. I am proud to say I was not one of them! I even managed to stay away from the Lang bashing!! Edited April 23, 2007 by Winged Scooter Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kp-Wings 3 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 (edited) Their still here, just stalking out a time to strike. God forbid Hasek gives up one goal, and they'll be back. Edited April 23, 2007 by Kp-Wings Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zata40 3 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 I agree, some people were giving up on our wings so easily. but now that they have won they shut up and jumped back on the wagon. people like that upset me Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Elshupacabra 0 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 They'll be back if Dallas doesn't win tonight Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BlakChamber 8 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 They took their lithium, so they're fine for now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kp-Wings 3 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 They took their lithium, so they're fine for now. You know that's only temporary though. Any sign of adversity and it wears off. Like magic! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeverForgetMac25 483 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 They took their lithium, so they're fine for now. And their Xanax. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
datspwns13 0 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 I am proud to say I was not one of them! I even managed to stay away from the Lang bashing!! Given the Wings past early playoff exits, I think it's almost justified that everyone went into panic mode. Pointing fingers and questioning their heart is a bit much, but the fear of losing is always legit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hank 0 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 And their Xanax. Oh, we're still here. But I stand by my past statements. Detroit played much differently in games 1,2,5 and 6 than they did in games 3 and 4. Nick Lidstrom said as much himself. I'm just glad that the Wings realised what they had done wrong in those games to correct it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
glasgowcelticwing 18 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 (edited) 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. Great post, I couldn't believe the amount of ( so called ) fans that came on here after last weeks defeat's in Calgary and spoke as if the world was ending ! These people need a reality check if they think the Wings are going to win every game. Facts are the Wings basically dominated most of this series and would have won in four games if it wasn't for Kipper. Rant over. Edited April 23, 2007 by glasgowcelticwing Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Tunbo Batman Report post Posted April 23, 2007 (edited) *mmph munch mmbrrpll mmhpmph* ...sorry, i was just finishing up that giant plate of crow i helped myself to It was delicious by the way. Anybody want some? ...oh, but there's no way we will make it past the seconde round Edited April 23, 2007 by Tunbo Batman Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Datzooky 0 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 If we had lost last night they would have been all over the boards. We could have lost very easily last night regardless of the unbelievable efforts of our team too. Exactly like you said it is obvious now that the Wings were a much better team if you look at the stats after the series, but at the same time 1 Calgary goal last night could have pushed a game seven which we could have lost just as easily. Then we would be back to the same old "no heart" threads that plague the boards. I don't think this series could have went any better for us in the long run though, as long as Homer gets back out on the ice quickly. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Winged Scooter 0 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 And their Xanax. I would actually reccommend Chantix, I am trying to quit smoking and it's doing a great job of keeping me mellow. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
glasgowcelticwing 18 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 If we had lost last night they would have been all over the boards. I don't think I could have handled that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Christopher Tequila 0 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 I can't remember who posted it, but the funniest of these doom and gloomers was the person who said he picked them to win it in 6 games, but then was giving up after game 4. Did he not realize that in order to win it in 6 games, it meant that they would have to lose a couple of games? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
aarond 0 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 Given the Wings past early playoff exits, I think it's almost justified that everyone went into panic mode. Pointing fingers and questioning their heart is a bit much, but the fear of losing is always legit. I actually agree with you on that. Fear of losing is part of fandom. But like you said, calling out the team's supposed lack of heart, desire, calling for the coach's head, etc., is irrational and knee-jerky. Once again, hockey can be a flukey sport at times. It's one of the only sports where your team can totally dominate and outplay a team but still lose because of certain equalizers, such as a hot goalie or a bad break. Just because you lost doesn't mean you didn't try, it doesn't necessarily mean you lack heart, or got outworked, or any crap like that. The Wings have had early exits in recent years, but if all of those teams that beat us went to the Finals and lost in 7. They all had hot goaltenders. And they all got ridiculously outshot by the Wings in those series. So yes, fear of losing is always legit. But the brazen personal criticism of the Wings, essentially implying that they lack character and manhood, was obnoxious. It's embarassing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hank 0 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 (edited) If we had lost last night they would have been all over the boards. We could have lost very easily last night regardless of the unbelievable efforts of our team too. Exactly like you said it is obvious now that the Wings were a much better team if you look at the stats after the series, but at the same time 1 Calgary goal last night could have pushed a game seven which we could have lost just as easily. Then we would be back to the same old "no heart" threads that plague the boards. I don't think this series could have went any better for us in the long run though, as long as Homer gets back out on the ice quickly. The difference was that last night the Wings played a lot better with more sustained forcheck pressure and worked harder along the walls than they did in games 3 and 4. If they had lost last night it would have been from Kipersoff and I would have lived with it - it wouldn't have been from not playing their 100% best. I didn't think Kipersoff was the difference in the two previous games in Calgary. I felt the Wings changed their strategy and lost because of it. And just because some of us here question how our team plays, how does that make us non-fans? How does it make us Bandwagon jumpers? If we were bandwagon jumpers we would have left here entirely. We wouldn't have been here all year round because band-wagon jumpers don't show up until the playoffs. Many of us 'nay sayers' have been on these boards for years. And I guarentee you I've been fan longer than most here. (going on 30 years). I was at games where there was only 5,000 in the seats. When the only guys to watch were Reed Larson and John Ogrognick. If anything, there are fans here who are braindead followers. They have no clue how the team is built, or the intangibles the team has. They simply put on their replica jersey and yell "Go Wings! I love the Wings! Stevie's so hot! Yaaaaaaaaaaaay!". That's a fan alright, albeit a dumb one. Just because I wrote them off doesn't mean I'm any less than a fan. I've been a Tiger fan for years too. In 2003, I told people, we won't make the playoffs. I guess I wasn't a true fan then either eh? Nevermind that they had an abysmal lineup, with questionable pitching and managing. But I guess to be a true fan, you should just stick your head in the sand and say "We're awesome! Go Tigers! We can never lose a game! Bless you boys!!!". If that's the case then I guess the Lions don't have any "TRUE" fans either because I've yet to find one that has told me that they will win the Super Bowl this year. What a bunch of fickle fans!!! Edited April 23, 2007 by Hank Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HockeyCrazy3033 168 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 I was going to make a thread like this today, but you beat me to it. What I wanna know is where are all those that were so AFRAID of Calgary? "OMG.we don't want the Flames...they are too tough." "The Wings are too soft, they can't handle Calgary." "Calgary is better offensively and on paper." "The Wings are going to wear down." "The Wings have no chance." WHERE ARE YOU PEOPLE? Come eat your crow. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wings_Fan_In_Exile 3 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 haha, do not underestimate them. They will return in full force at the first sign of COMPETITION. Apparently the Stanley Cup Finals should be easy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
glasgowcelticwing 18 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 haha, do not underestimate them. They will return in full force at the first sign of COMPETITION. Apparently the Stanley Cup Finals should be easy. Sadly this is true. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NKYWingsFan 4 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 mmmmm.....xanax Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
aarond 0 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 The difference was that last night the Wings played a lot better with more sustained forcheck pressure and worked harder along the walls than they did in games 3 and 4. If they had lost last night it would have been from Kipersoff and I would have lived with it - it wouldn't have been from not playing their 100% best. I didn't think Kipersoff was the difference in the two previous games in Calgary. I felt the Wings changed their strategy and lost because of it. And just because some of us here question how our team plays, how does that make us non-fans? How does it make us Bandwagon jumpers? If we were bandwagon jumpers we would have left here entirely. We wouldn't have been here all year round because band-wagon jumpers don't show up until the playoffs. Many of us 'nay sayers' have been on these boards for years. And I guarentee you I've been fan longer than most here. (going on 30 years). I was at games where there was only 5,000 in the seats. When the only guys to watch were Reed Larson and John Ogrognick. If anything, there are fans here who are braindead followers. They have no clue how the team is built, or the intangibles the team has. They simply put on their replica jersey and yell "Go Wings! I love the Wings! Stevie's so hot! Yaaaaaaaaaaaay!". That's a fan alright, albeit a dumb one. Just because I wrote them off doesn't mean I'm any less than a fan. I've been a Tiger fan for years too. In 2003, I told people, we won't make the playoffs. I guess I wasn't a true fan then either eh? Nevermind that they had an abysmal lineup, with questionable pitching and managing. But I guess to be a true fan, you should just stick your head in the sand and say "We're awesome! Go Tigers! We can never lose a game! Bless you boys!!!". If that's the case then I guess the Lions don't have any "TRUE" fans either because I've yet to find one that has told me that they will win the Super Bowl this year. What a bunch of fickle fans!!! 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. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dabura 12,205 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 I'd just like to say I kept my cool. Which I usually don't do. That said, you made your point, Aaron. Move on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hank 0 Report post Posted April 23, 2007 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. I agree that questioning their 'manhood' was out of bounds. Although I do think they played more of a sissified system in games 3 and 4 (remenicsent to 04 and 06) compared to their victories. That's why I was worried. After seeing how well Detroit played in games 1 and 2, to seeing how they played differently in games 3 and 4, I was genuinly concerned that they couldn't play in the same fashion as they had at the joe. I'm glad I was wrong. I'm glad Lidstrom and Babcock challenged the team to get back to what got them the 2-0 lead. And I hope this has shown the entire team that they have to play with that kind of physicality the rest of the way. If Calgary had more than 2 forwards without cement hands, we could have lost games 3 and 4 by wider margins. We need to keep the peddle on the gas the entire time and outwork teams 100% of the time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites