sergei_is_still_a_wing 1 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 The Detroit Red Wings went from a 54-21-7, finishing first in the league, to winning it all-----> Best team? CHECK. The Wings clearly performed at a superior level than the Celtics throughout the season. The fact that the Celtics had to pull themselves out of a considerable deficit to win makes them a cute bedtime story, but not the best. The fact they had to dig themselves out of a hole immediately writes themselves off as being the best (though kudos to them for winning their championship). The Wings, on the other hand, made sure they never had to do that. THAT is what a winning team is about. My point was that the media loves cinderella stories. The celtics had one, and we have more or less dominated the sport more than any other team in the last 10-12 years. So it was no Surprise When we won lord stanley for the 4th time in 11 Years. Plus no one really cares about hockey, so you can't be surprised. look at Josh Hamilton for example. The guy became addicted to crack after being picked NUMBER ONE in the 98 draft. He now has 95 RBI's at the all star break. I'll crap in my own mouth if the guy doesn't win MVP simply because of his story (even if a guy on his own team has better slugging and OBP---> Milton Bradley). AND thanks Opie for getting my back on that one! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest mindfly Report post Posted July 17, 2008 (edited) Can anyone explain to me how you guys watch hockey in U.S... i believe the michigan natives watch regular season on FSN Detroit (HDTV?) right? and maybe some special games on national NBC... Is Versus a standard channel that everyone can watch or just at some places? Can americans watch TSN/CBC or is that for canadian residents only? How come ESPN don't broadcast NHL anymore? I remember i used to watch nhl games on ESPN when i visited my grandparents in florida years ago.. hmm, i know hockey is a minor sport in U.S but come on, NHL should be huge anyway. Edited July 17, 2008 by mindfly Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Datsyerberger 279 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 (edited) You missed the point, last season they went 28-56, this season they won 60+ games and the championship. Last year the wings were two wins away from the SCF, this year they won the championship. His point was that the C's were a horrible team turned into a very very good team, within one offseason. They didn't go 28-56 this year and win the championship. Like the Wings, the C's were the best team in the league start to finish this season, had the best D, and one of the best O's in the league. The two teams have a lot of parallels, except for the previous seasons success. And unlike the Celtics, the Wings also rocked the season last year. It has more to do with what the other person replying to my post pointed out, the media loooves Cinderella stories. I'm aware of the fact, but it still disgusts me a bit, to be honest. That, and basketball is more popular (and one that ESPN covers). If they DIDN'T give the Celtics (who play in one of the "1st tier" sports) the win, with a record like they have, there'd be a lot more NBA fans crying bloody murder than NHL fans--we already know that ESPN is lame. (Edit: By the way, though I know the play and rules of basketball, my (lack of) knowledge regarding the actual play of the NBA franchises is made evident by my previous post. All I really knew is that the Celtics sucked sometime recently and they won the championship this year, and the Feel-Good Story light immediately turned on.) Edited July 17, 2008 by The Wheeled Winger Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Doc Holiday 0 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 Can anyone explain to me how you guys watch hockey in U.S... i believe the michigan natives watch regular season on FSN Detroit (HDTV?) right? and maybe some special games on national NBC... Is Versus a standard channel that everyone can watch or just at some places? Can americans watch TSN/CBC or is that for canadian residents only? How come ESPN don't broadcast NHL anymore? I remember i used to watch nhl games on ESPN when i visited my grandparents in florida years ago.. hmm, i know hockey is a minor sport in U.S but come on, NHL should be huge anyway. I think Versus bought rights to it or something but I really don't know. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Opie 308 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 And unlike the Celtics, the Wings also rocked the season last year. It has more to do with what the other person replying to my post pointed out, the media loooves Cinderella stories. I'm aware of the fact, but it still disgusts me a bit, to be honest. That, and basketball is more popular (and one that ESPN covers). If they DIDN'T give the Celtics (who play in one of the "1st tier" sports) the win, with a record like they have, there'd be a lot more NBA fans crying bloody murder than NHL fans--we already know that ESPN is lame. The C's were more dominant throughout the season than the wings, because the had a crappy season last year the turn around makes the story better. Plus the C's were not a Cinderella story, as soon as they got Garnett and Allen they were a top pick before the season started. So because you don't like or watch basketball that doesn't mean the award is less valid, and for the last time: THE AWARD IS VOTED ON BY FANS, ESPN GAVE NO ONE THE AWARD!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Datsyerberger 279 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 and for the last time: THE AWARD IS VOTED ON BY FANS, ESPN GAVE NO ONE THE AWARD!!! I'm aware... I just like bashing ESPN... is that so bad? Honestly, I do think that the Celtics deserve the win given my now-knowledge of their season record, but I still believe that there's a Cinderella effect going on that influenced quite a few voters in their favor. What about the Giants tackling the behemoth Packers? That's an interesting story as well. But I regress, I posted mainly to argue a point. As you can likely tell from my numerous replies in this thread, I have nothing better to do. And sadly, since it's the offseason, I've already read each post in the first 2 pages like 20 times. WHEN WILL OCTOBER BE HERE?! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Opie 308 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 (edited) This thread and that last post show your overall sports knowledge, before you go bashing a sports network about what award it gives out you should know something about more than just hockey! Edit: Crappy spelling! Edited July 17, 2008 by Opie Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest EZBAKETHAGANGSTA Report post Posted July 17, 2008 There is absolutely nothing wrong with this. But.. but.. but... ESPN IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE HOLOCAUST! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Datsyerberger 279 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 (edited) This thread and that last post show your overall sports knowledge, before you go bashing a sports network about what award it gives out you should know something about more than just hockey! Some minor sports occasionally, baseball (not as much as I used to, but I keep an eye on it), football (more college than pro), soccer, hockey. The latter three are the only ones I watch with any degree of regularity (and then, mostly hockey), but I have a bad tendency to read an unnecessary amount of sports forums and news (even though I'm not a huge sports fan, besides hockey) just due to a fast pace of reading and an excessive amount of free time. I do find the fact that you insulted (or atleast, challenged) an aspect of me based on a comparison of a total of 2 (out of 10s or 100s) of sports distasteful, but seeing as I'm spending my time being intentionally argumentative anyhow, it's not entirely unjustified. I'm certainly not going to reciprocate, but I would ask that you refrain. I enjoy reading your material, usually, as you are an intelligent and knowledgeable poster. Oh, and for the record, I have watched plenty of ESPN, and I stand by my bashing of it. It is an entertainment network before it is a news network--which ultimately isn't bad, as they are a business foremost and that's what makes money for them. However, other than keeping an eye on game scores and large news, I respect their authority on sports about as far as I can toss them. I'm a member of the small, boring minority that prefer straight, dull news over entertainment. (Edit again: I freely admit to knowing very little about basketball news, other than championship winners and major players. As noted in my previous post, I concede the Celtics are deserving of the title of best team this year--though I disagree with the possible reasons some may have for voting them as such.) Edited July 17, 2008 by The Wheeled Winger Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Opie 308 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 (edited) I am not saying don't bash ESPN, What I said was you showed a lack of overall general sports knowledge, in your posts you had relatively no clue about two completely different sports including two of the 4 teams involved in the award you are bashing them for handing out. IF you are going to go onto a public forum and state an opinion it is a pretty safe bet your opinion will get challenged, if you then show a complete lack of knowledge when it comes to the subject you are debating you are going to come out on the losing end. If you argument is that the Red Wings were the best team, how can that be when your opinion is void of all of the details, you don't even know which team is the behemoth and which team is the cinderella. IF ESPN or the media really had a hard on for the Cinderella like you said the Giants would have won the award for beating the PATRIOTS, who were on the precipice of going 19-0, were being included in the discussion of greatest teams of all times. They wouldn't have given to Boston who from wire to wire was the best team in the NBA. I was not commenting on you, I didn't call you stupid, I simply pointed out you were in a debate in which you only knew about half of the information, that is assuming you even know who the 4th team nominated was and what they did to get there. That would be like a person who only listens to country music complaining that the Band of the year went to a different Genre but they don't know anything about the other contestants, they are just mad their music didn't win. And you APPEAR to be just upset your team didn't win the award. And yes your posts make it appear that you know very little about the major sports, I am sorry if you are a cricket expert and I offended you, the conversation was about an award show based on the major sports, which you were showing a general lack of knowledge about, if you had started bringing up Jai Lai teams that should have won I wouldn't have insinuated you had a LACK of knowledge for all sports. Edited July 17, 2008 by Opie Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Datsyerberger 279 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 (edited) Reply to Opie: The problem, then, comes to you misinterpreting my posts, rather than a lack of knowledge on my part. That may be due to my writing; if so, I apologize. My argument has been neither that the Wings should have won the award, nor that the voting was based solely on the Cinderella effect. More specifically, my argument in my original reply was arguing -against- someone using the Cinderella effect (the Celtics previous 28-56 record) in his or her argument for the Celtics winning. I would certainly argue, personally, that it likely had a decent effect on the voting results. However, I certainly don't believe that's the sole purpose for their winning of the ESPY, nor that such an effect should be the voters reason for voting for them (though that likely did happen, to some degree). I never did argue that the Wings should have won, or that the Giants should have won due to beating the Pats (I was cheering for the Pats, by the way.) I was simply using them as examples to shoot down the Celtics winning due entirely to the Cinderella effect (if it were all Cinderella effect, it would have gone to the Giants.. if it were all based on skill and not market size, the Wings DO make a competitive candidate for the Celtics this year.) Logically, two intentionally vague, nondescript comments on my behalf do not make for very good grounds for determining the entirety of my sports knowledge. You may not have intended an insult at me, but your entire argument was solid and just fine as it was without bringing such into question (and, due to the rather loose grounds on which you so did, it weakens the integrity of your otherwise strong arguments, in my own view.) Doing so was more or less and elegant equivalent of tying off your arguments with a statement of "LOL NOOB!!!1one". Edit (I see a bad habit forming): I couldn't give a rats ass about cricket, by the way. Just thought I'd throw that one out there. Edited July 17, 2008 by The Wheeled Winger Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shockwave180 0 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 Bloody heck, it's the ESPYs. Who cares? We are the Stanley Cup Champions. Repeat ad nauseum, and smile. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Datsyerberger 279 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 .. if you had started bringing up Jai Lai teams that should have won I wouldn't have insinuated you had a LACK of knowledge for all sports. This deserves a comment. I indeed could name a team or two (though not Jai Lai, mind you) that I think is worthy, but doing so would have ruined the objectivity of my arguments--that is, referring to the mainstream American sports market to which a good majority here will be most familiar. (To sum that up casually: I could bring that up, but I'd be lucky to find 1/200 people who gave a flying f***). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Datsyerberger 279 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 Bloody heck, it's the ESPYs. Who cares? We are the Stanley Cup Champions. Repeat ad nauseum, and smile. I'm bored; this is how I cope. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GMRwings1983 8,794 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 It doesn't matter what the Celtics did and didn't do. espn would never allow a hockey team to win such an award. They would have given it to the Little League Baseball Champions before they'd give it to the Wings. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Datsyerberger 279 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 Okay, for the sake of starting up a more hockey-related discussion about the ESPY's here (without beating Crosby to death): How about Best Play: Eli Manning's pass to David Tyree? I have to admit, that one was spectacular. However, are there any plays that you would put up against that? Maybe some Wings plays? How about Zetterberg's ninja backflip flying wristshot goal? Or Zetterberg's escaping 4/5 of the other teams skaters to "QB" Pavel for his hat trick? Zetterberg doesn't get a line of blockers. The Manning one was brilliant (and needed) so it is certainly worthy, but anything you would have put up for that? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Opie 308 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 (edited) Okay, for the sake of starting up a more hockey-related discussion about the ESPY's here (without beating Crosby to death): How about Best Play: Eli Manning's pass to David Tyree? I have to admit, that one was spectacular. However, are there any plays that you would put up against that? Maybe some Wings plays? How about Zetterberg's ninja backflip flying wristshot goal? Or Zetterberg's escaping 4/5 of the other teams skaters to "QB" Pavel for his hat trick? Zetterberg doesn't get a line of blockers. The Manning one was brilliant (and needed) so it is certainly worthy, but anything you would have put up for that? This one I will agree 100% on, Tyree's catch over an old and shadow of his former self Harrison (stated as a pats fan) was impressive, but there were a lot more impressive things that happened over the past year! Edit: if his catch had been like the one from 2 NCAA football seasons ago where that kid from Alabama caught the ball with the defender's helmet between his helmet and the ball and pressed the ball against the defenders helmet the two players rolled over and he still managed to catch it and score a touchdown, that was some impressive s***! Edited July 17, 2008 by Opie Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Datsyerberger 279 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 if his catch had been like the one from 2 NCAA football seasons ago where that kid from Alabama caught the ball with the defender's helmet between his helmet and the ball and pressed the ball against the defenders helmet the two players rolled over and he still managed to catch it and score a touchdown, that was some impressive s***! Heh, I remember that one. A friend of mine was at the game, told me about it on AIM later on. Didn't believe how awesome it was until I saw it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RedArmy 4 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 I think I may have watched 5 minutes of ESPN this whole year... who cares? For a hockey players it more important to win something actually hockey fan related Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jvxp 0 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 I honestly have a lot of trouble watching ESPN anymore. Same with me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
timothy1997 0 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 I bet if the NHL had a deal in place with ESPN we wouldn't see nearly as much of that, if any at all. I don't think that they should win it over the Sox or Celtics, but the Giants? Sure they were a good team and pulled off a huge upset but I just don't see the Giants as a better football team than the Wings are a hockey team. The Red Sox, Red Wings were wire-to-wire champs. You can say all you want but when it comes down to it, you cannot be surprised that they won it all. Celtics had an unbelievable turnaround but most of the credit goes to the acquistion of the big 3. Take Crosby, AO, and Joey T....and any team in the NHL can be a playoff, cup contending team. Even the Florida Panthers. The Giants overcame the most difficult odds when compared to what the wings, celtics, and sox had to face. They were the true underdogs and defeated the undefeated team. No one gave them a shot to win it, even right before the championship game. What the Giants did is a testament that teamwork pays off. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaKineMaui 8 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 The Wings won the Stanley Cup so I pose this question, who cares about an Espy? I mean, good for Crosby, I'm glad he won an award that means absolutely nothing. Pretty much sums it up for me as well. Go man! ESPY yer ASS off! Parade it around the town, (or whatever yer spoda do). You WON it man! We're gonna ESPY all night! For me personally, IF I wanna watch slam-dunks, homeruns, TD passes/runs CONSTANTLY, then I tune to ESPN. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WisconsinWingNut 0 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 I was just listening to the Jim Rome show driving to lunch, and someone other than Rome was on and a caller asked about the hockey schedule. The guy admitted he had not looked at it, then proceeed to cover up by mocking hockey for the next minute... "Yeah, hockey... is that still a sport? Is Favre going to play in the NHL this year.... yeah, hockey... whatever." It really does amaze me how such a fast, agressive and dynamic sport is not only overlooked, but openly mocked and ridiculed by many sports personalities. I can see how soccer is mocked by American sports guys, but hockey is a different beast altogether. Just is strange to me. Jim Who?? He still gets paid to boradcast dead air and paper shuffling? Only in America... Too bad his little mind can't produce a whole sentence in one breath. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MississippiWing 14 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 yeah looking at the rest of the winners, I'm just calling bulls*** on this year's ESPYS. ESPN wants to blow any person this year who was great and is showning hints of their old self kinda like Tiger Woods. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
auxlepli 17 Report post Posted July 17, 2008 (edited) I was just listening to the Jim Rome show driving to lunch, and someone other than Rome was on and a caller asked about the hockey schedule. The guy admitted he had not looked at it, then proceeed to cover up by mocking hockey for the next minute... "Yeah, hockey... is that still a sport? Is Favre going to play in the NHL this year.... yeah, hockey... whatever." I don't think Jim Rome would have done this. It's one reason why I like Rome. He's a blowhard at times, but at least he's entertaining. Rome also has hockey guests on his show from time to time. That can't be said for any other ESPN talking head. Edited July 17, 2008 by auxlepli Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
