DIBdaQUIB Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 Err how many mis information I see in this single reply? 1. Luongo didn't walk from Florida. His team traded him to Vancouver when luongo was very close of signing an extension with Florida. 2. His cap hit is 5.1 or 5.3 million. And he didn't take a cut to stay in Vancouver? 3. NHL players play for their team, not for the fans. Especially not for the ones who will backstab him whenever he has a bad game. 4. Also in regard of the above point: Luongo is involved with several charities. Like many Canucks players, he has spent time with Canuck Place, a children's hospice in Vancouver.[9] He also sponsors a spectator's box in Rogers Arena that is reserved for underprivileged children to attend Canucks games.[9] At the end of games in which he has been named one of the three stars, he has been known to give away his goalie stick to a fan in the crowd.[9] In the summer of 2009, he hosted the Roberto Luongo Golf Open to benefit Montreal Children's Hospital, Sainte-Justine Hospital, and a seniors centre network in Saint-Léonard.[9] This guy is so misinformed that its not even funny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIBdaQUIB Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 Funny, I don't see anywhere in that direct quote of MG's that there is a trade deal in place for Luo. Just merely more folks reading stuff into words that don't say that at all. Baaaaaaa...., indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertuzzi Babe Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 You're being deliverately obtuse. MG's response was a direct response to a question regarding the trading of Lu. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frazzY Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 You're being deliberately obtuse. MG's response was a direct response to a question regarding the trading of Lu. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aladeen Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 It's hard to prove urself when u get two bad games and get yanked , losing Ur starting position. What a joke. Then guy is not going to be perfect all the friggin time. They are showing zero patience with him and no doubt, I don't care what Schneider is actually saying, it will effect his confidence. So he's nervous to have the stating position and was gripping the stick a little too tight his first game? I got a great idea. Lets solve that by pulling him it the next five games!!!!!!! They let Lu " play through his rough patches " for half a decade. They couldn't however let Schneider play through two bad games ? This man love for luongo is killing the potential in Schneider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
86Viking Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 I'll say this again, play a goalie till he loses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InTheCrease Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 Funny, I don't see anywhere in that direct quote of MG's that there is a trade deal in place for Luo. Just merely more folks reading stuff into words that don't say that at all. Baaaaaaa...., indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIBdaQUIB Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 He still never said Lu, Gillis is very careful what he says to the media, and along with a list of teams im sure Lu would also like to stay here. He has been nothing short of a pro through all this. Plus im sure the guys in the locker room want him to stay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertuzzi Babe Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 I agree, until he actually says "We have a deal in place regarding Roberto Luongo" it could be either of them. In fact the quote be interpreted differently. “We have a potential deal in place with one team that has to do something with another player that they have — and it’s not who anybody thinks it is". The bolded may not refer to the player on the other team, it could very well be someone on our team as being the player nobody thinks it is (read: Schneider) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aladeen Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 You're being deliberately obtuse. MG's response was a direct response to a question regarding the trading of Lu. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIBdaQUIB Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 I agree, until he actually says "We have a deal in place regarding Roberto Luongo" it could be either of them. In fact the quote be interpreted differently. “We have a potential deal in place with one team that has to do something with another player that they have — and it’s not who anybody thinks it is". The bolded may not refer to the player on the other team, it could very well be someone on our team as being the player nobody thinks it is (read: Schneider) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 LINK: http://blogs.theprov...ongo-wants-out/ Yesterday it was confirmed by newly re-signed head coach Alain Vigneault that Roberto Luongo does indeed want out of Vancouver. Alain Vigneault, talking to the show "The Match" (I have no idea what show that is either. First thought is they interview people while playing tennis), disclosed that "This is what he wants now … And what we must do is [make the best decision] for our organization." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMyMeMine Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 I don't think that by Luit coming out like that, he understands that his comments may give a hint to other teams that Canucks may have internal pressure to get the deal done and may present a less-than-ideal offer to MG, and of course, MG isn't going to bite on a subpar deal, which leads to an even longer wait, especially when Luongo continues playing at this awesome level. If Luit wants the "problem" to be solved quickly, he should keep his comments internal with MG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIBdaQUIB Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aladeen Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 Ignorance is bliss! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 You can take any comment out of context and spin it to your own agenda, right ES? (We see your practice of doing so post after post.) As can the media, which does it all the time.........and don't forget a slew of disappointed fans at the time. You and others, including the media, having been putting words in MG's mouth and in Luo's mouth for months now. And I love it that now MG, AV and Luo himself are just toying with the media and the naysayers with each and every comment. Y'all are so easily led.......baaaaaaaa......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIBdaQUIB Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 You must be the freaking happiest person on the planet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 Funny, I don't see anywhere in that direct quote of MG's that there is a trade deal in place for Luo. Just merely more folks reading stuff into words that don't say that at all. Baaaaaaa...., indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aladeen Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 And that would be a factor in this discussion how? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 I agree, until he actually says "We have a deal in place regarding Roberto Luongo" it could be either of them. In fact the quote be interpreted differently. “We have a potential deal in place with one team that has to do something with another player that they have — and it’s not who anybody thinks it is". The "who anybody thinks it is" may not refer to the player on the other team, it could very well be someone on our team as being the player nobody thinks it is (read: Schneider) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.