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

How did the Canucks Lose so bad then ?


Ballisticsports.

Recommended Posts

I would take those over missing the playoffs year in and year out and not improving.

People who remember the dark Keenan years should realize how fortunate we are to have such stable ownership and a chance to win every season.

If we knock on the door enough times year after year, eventually we're gonna break through. Until then it's important to look on the bright side, and not be bitter self loathing fans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any year you make the playoffs you have a chance to win, even if you're an 8th seed.

Pretty much every year the Canucks have been knocked out in the last 5 years has been by some of the most dominant teams in playoff history (Ducks, Blackhawks, Kings), and were the eventual cup winners. The more years in a row we make the playoffs, the better chance that we give ourselves to not run into a team like that, but rather be that team.

You can be a pessimist all you want, I like to believe that we are getting closer and closer to the prize. Not unlike the Detroit Red Wings that lost in the finals in 95' only to come back two years later and win back to back cups. They also won the president's trophy two years in a row before winning it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any year you make the playoffs you have a chance to win, even if you're an 8th seed.

Pretty much every year the Canucks have been knocked out in the last 5 years has been by some of the most dominant teams in playoff history (Ducks, Blackhawks, Kings), and were the eventual cup winners. The more years in a row we make the playoffs, the better chance that we give ourselves to not run into a team like that, but rather be that team.

You can be a pessimist all you want, I like to believe that we are getting closer and closer to the prize. Not unlike the Detroit Red Wings that lost in the finals in 95' only to come back two years later and win back to back cups. They also won the president's trophy two years in a row before winning it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

are you off Your meds?

Geez if not please look into something

Naslund was Not a 18 yr old kid

He was 24 !

Naslund was Not the 1st line Player,So Naslund Never had to play against the Top players in the League

I Never said Naslund was the Naslund he would later become

I said he had to have had the skill set and dedication to have become that player

Try comprehending what You read,before spouting off on someone

In

2001 Henrik Sedin was 20

2005 Kesler was 21

Stamkos became the 6th player in NHL history to score over 50 goals before turning 23

your point and logic are ?

I suggest that makes Your Post the most bs You should have read all day ! ( problem is Your comprehending what You write too I suppose) and therefore makes Your logic flawed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think what we're trying to say is in order to grow as a fan with a team you need to acknowledge/celebrate the accomplishments. Even if they come in the regular season. Sure you don't celebrate them as if they are the pinnacle of hockey success but a cup or bust mentality will ultimately lead to disappointment most years (only 1 team can win the cup after all) and chances are you'll miss out on a lot of the journey when a Canuck team eventually does win the cup because you won't start really investing time until the Canucks are on the verge of winning.

Being a fan isn't about cheering for the winner. It's about cheering for the team that you are passionate about, through thick and thin. There's nothing wrong with criticizing the team, we all have ideas on what this team needs to do. But to say anything less than a cup is utter failure. Well, that's no fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Open your eyes junior, this Canucks team is a powerhouse from the coach on down.

To all the AV haters, Bowman won the president's trophy two years in a row without winning the cup, and that Red Wings team got swept in the finals in their first appearance. I'm sure people were even calling for Bowman's head at the time.

So no, to compare a team with two MVP's and Art Ross Winners, a Selke winner, a Jack Adams winner, and a Jennings winner is not laughable.

I'll remind you that the league was ALOT less competitive then, and the Red Wings had the same advantage of being in a weak division.

And FYI, those players are hall of famers because they won the cup. It took winning it all to make them legendary players, just like it will take the Sedins, Kesler, and the rest of the team to do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...