Not making excuses for him. Holland's MO for a while now has been hanging onto players for too long. Why would this be any different?
because at the time of signing the contract, datsyuk was still an elite player. according to holland, datsyuk did not want to do one year deals. which as datsyuk said in the mitch album article says was a mistake and that he should have taken the one year deals
holland has made a lot of mistakes the last few years, but the datsyuk situation is not one of them
Someone said above that people are complaining because LC's pizza sucks? It's more than that. Is any other NHL arena named after a fast food restaurant? It's just a dumb idea. Illitch didn't name Tiger Stadium Little Caesar's Stadium, but all of a sudden it's a good name for the new home of the Red Wings? Not surprising though I guess since he seems to care about the Tigers a lot more these days. The Wings have won four cups since he's owned the team, so maybe he's taking a break from caring too much about them until he gets his Tigers a World Series. Thanks Mikey.
who cares if it's named after restaurant? Like was mentioned before, airline companies and banks are way more corrupt than little ceaser's, yet nobody complains about stadiums being named after those companies
I'm surprised more people don't realize how much little ceaser's has been involved in promoting and developing youth hockey in michigan. That alone makes it a better choice than a lot of other companies imo
can't imagine what the reaction would be if an actual fraud company like amway got the naming rights. heck, there should be more hatred towards airline companies and banks. these companies have been ripping people off for years
little ceaser's has been associated with hockey in michigan for decades all the way back to the 70's with the start of the little ceaser's amateur league. Little Cesar's has done more to promote and devleop hockey in this area than any other company
it's a shame people are using something so petty such as their dislike of the pizza as the reason why the arena shouldn't be named after little Ceaser's
Posted by chances14
on 25 September 2014 - 06:25 PM
I love fighting. I like the spectacle. I love that extra dimension it gives to the sport. It's truly unique. I wish the instigator rule was not in place. I loved when their was a heavy weight matchup of Probert v. Domi, and seeing who was going to win the belt from the other. I loved that if anyone touched Yzerman Probie would immediately turn into the hulk and smash their face in, no matter what the consequences were for himself. I loved when McCarty turtled Lemieux, because I literally wanted vengeance and blood for what he did to Draper.
But here's why I think your argument stinks Frank. Everyone who I know that is pro-fighting (including myself) whines about how - since the instigator rule - the enforcers ability to protect and scare off the rats is almost completely diminished. Fighting USED to protect stars to an EXTENT, but not anymore, and that's what pisses off pro-fighting advocates and why everyone calls for the repeal of the instigator penalty.
So please, don't act like having McMeatbag on the fourth line/bench is going to protect Datsyuk. All that guy can do is instigate a revenge fight at a later time. And Scuderi can easily just say no at that time, and then we have another possible Bertuzzi-Moore situation on our hands.
If you want the culture of protective fighting you have to:
1) repeal the instigator rule
2) find a guy who can drop the gloves AND play top line minutes
3) time-travel back to the 1980s
Fighting these days is used to possibly change the mood of a game and/or to seek vengeance. And it puts fans like you and I in the stands. That's it.
agreed. i love fighting as much as the next guy but the reality is that in today's game, it serves no purpose other than to entertain the fans
Posted by chances14
on 25 September 2014 - 01:51 PM
Because many of them know they can hide behind the refs. And I dont necessarily mean the instigating rule -I mean literally hide behind the refs, and the NHL will let them. For what reason? To clean up its act...??
If McGrattan played for our team, Scuderi would have hit someone like Miller or Cleary instead.
At least I would, in his position.
lol. and you know this how? there have been so many instances of players taking runs at star players on pertty much every team that this notion is laughable.
enforcers do not deter players from taking cheapshots anymore thanks in large part to how the nhl has changed the rules
Remember in 2008, when lapeirre took a run at lidstrom and injured him. downey was in the lineup but that didnt stop him from going after lidstrom
or how about kronwall this past season when mcleod boarded him right next to tootoo.
Yes, and this is because the league will protect the dirty players. Scrap the instigator rule and leave the policing to the players. If a guy is willing to face the music after running a star then so be it, I agree there's no stopping them, but at least dont protect these clowns. Let there be another Lemieux beatdown. I bet more than a few players would think twice and even change their game. Frankly, it cannot get worse than the current state.
it's hilarious to think by today's standards that mccarty only got a 5 min major for fighting after that beatdown. If he did that today, he would probably be gone for the year