Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

We Are All Cucks

Members
  • Posts

    262
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

2,027 profile views

We Are All Cucks's Achievements

Abbotsford Prospect

Abbotsford Prospect (2/14)

132

Reputation

  1. I doubt you'd get the whole arena to chant that, but can you imagine? The owner is so prideful that this would surely resonate. This whole debacle goes to show how badly the owner has made things since the end of the Gillis era - when his hands were clearly tied - through to the Linden thing, and now with Benning making/being forced into making choice that are simply not good long term operational decisions. The theme here is ownership being too involved. Always has been. The only way forward, I'd say most would agree, is at least a new GM and coach, if not a president that will buffer the owner from the team. The debate lies in how/when to go about these things. Let's put it this way though: if an interim GM and interim coach were put in place and had the same/slightly worse record than what they have under the current ones, would that be worse optically than what is going on now? I'm of the strong opinion that the answer is 'no'. People would kind of expect that to happen. And be okay with it. It would represent the start of a rebuilding process. Would it be worse on our players? Again, no. They'd have a different voice, and could learn from it. They'd immediately escape the dumpster fire that is the current situation. They need that. Now, if the new interim coach/GM were to do *better* than our current group, obviously that's a good thing (like frogurt). Leaving it as is only makes everyting worse (like pottasium benzoate). By not firing both immediately, the owner is again showing he's not thinking in the best long term interests of the team. I obvs want success for the team and the owner, but I'm sure it's not coming. And I'm sure the new management group will be equally influenced and corrupted by the owner.
  2. Actually an interesting under-the-radar idea there. What's he been up to? If he won't come, maybe one of the 12 other brothers will
  3. Back in their day as the 86ers the Whitecaps had one of their players (Lenarduzzi?) as both player and coach. Maybe get Petey to be head coach...see if it helps his game to coach himself? Miller to draw up some systems? Garland to be assistant coach in charge of spin-o-ramas in the corner? Motte is back - if not full on head coach, he could be official coach of pre-game pump-ups. Lots of possibilities here.
  4. If it happens, it needs to be somebody with the tag "interm" placed before their title. More dominos will likely fall, and there's no sense in bringing in somebody on a more permanent contract until the rest of whatever "shakeup" we're going to see takes place.
  5. You'd think being at the longest ever Canuck's game would be something you'd want to brag about; an exciting event; a tale for the ages. Well, when you shell out huge dollars to bring a date to the game, the beer stops being flowing after the second period (and you've got like 8 more periods to go), it's too loud to adequately converse, and the only event the two of you can rally around is another Luongo save, you kind of just end up wanting to forget. But, even if I try to forget, my credit card remembers.
  6. I remember reading fantasy news in a hockey magazine at Safeway (remember magazines?!) prior to the post-Carter year. The advice, roughly paraphrased here was: "Don't draft the Sedins too high. Their potential for bust is through the roof without Carter to play with". Now, nothing personal against Anson - seemed like a good dude - but did he ever make a mistake not re-signing. And also, could that also be the reason we don't buy magazines anymore? I mean, I'm open to other suggestions, but I feel like flabbergasting miscalculations like that could be the very reason they went out of style.
  7. Lots of focus here on whether Quenneville adequately "owned up to his mistake" or not, and consequently, whether we ought to "accept" this ownership. Two things in response to that. First of all, the conditions under which he made the apology are immediately tainted, as has been mentioned. It's hard to take his words at face value. Based on the timeline of the "admission" and resignation, etc., he has relinquished any benefit of the doubt. Put this way: is the power of his apology stronger or weaker if he comes out sooner? Obviously sooner, so in this case, it will take longer for people to believe the integrity of the apology. There is a direct relationship between the amount of time it takes to own up and the amount of time it takes for others to believe someone is actually sorry. Secondly, the focus on whether Quenneville has adequately apologized is kind of missing the point. An apology doesn't absolve somebody just as pleading 'guilty' doesn't get you off the hook for murder. Second chances are hugely important, but for goodness' sake let's not just hand them out at the first sound of a squeaky sorry - earn them. (And for the record, second chance really shouldn't mean a multi-million dollar contract as a leader of a high-profile sports team) - as for the first point, for his own benefit, Chevyldayoff ought to take notice
  8. Is he the one that wrote the letter of recommendation? If so, he bears significant responsibilty for putting young people in danger. It's despicable. These actions can't be undone. As with the Mailloux situation, here's how contrition works: you admit responsibility, you work your ass off to make things right. Why do you do this? Not to get your old life back, not to "make up" for something that can't be undone. You do it because it's the right thing to do and you are truly eager to prevent these things from happening again *for their own sake*. As soon as he takes another job, I question the value of his repentance, because it appears he wasn't making amends for the right reasons. As for him being a good coach, think about the players who he will be in charge of in the future. How will they play for him? Will they trust his hockey mind, likely. Will he ever again have full trust of his players as an individual who is batting for his team? I doubt that. This alone seems like a good enough reason never to hire this excrement again.
  9. To be fair to Hirsch, Cheech is off-topic, has weird stories, and sometimes doesn't gel with Shorty. We tolerate (and even enjoy) this because we are familiar with him, it's funny in an old-man-who-likes-pizza kind of way, and he's a living classic. As some have mentioned, Hirsch does similar things. Thing is, he hasn't had the chance to create chemistry with Shorthouse, and is still picking up the art. Positive is that Hirsch has a lot of the positive characteristics Garrett does. I say if he continues, by the end of the season he's gonna grow on a bunch of people, and he'll have a bunch of homers on his side.
  10. Honest question: Do you think Buffalo and Detroit do these trades? I feel like unprotected 1sts wouldn't be included in either deal.
×
×
  • Create New...