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

Believe in... Blackballing ?


darkpoet

Recommended Posts

Gollumpus.

It's called money.

The executives go to where money is.

The owner continues to own a team, because he makes money, or can make money from it.

The league goes where teams can be sustained.

The Cup goes to American winners, because the of untapped wealth in the States. (marketing, endorsements and broadcasting) 10 times the marketshare of Canada, and probably 50 times the wealth.

danjr

I'm aware of this. I even noted them in my post(s). Perhaps you missed those points.

Yes, executives go where the money is. I suspect that they also like to win. So if you're Benning, and you're offered a GM job by two different teams, do you go to the team which has the a chance at winning the Cup, or do you go to the Canucks? And how much more would it take for you to come to the Canucks, since I'm assuming you would aware of this conspiracy to prevent them from winning the Cup? $100K? $200K? Full dental?

And I even get the idea about the NHL wanting to grow the game in the US, and how they favour the US teams to win at the expense of the Canadian teams. What I would like the OP to explain is this: where the money is coming from to pay off the owners of the Canadian teams? Surely they must be in on this cospiracy. If they are surrendering their right to win a Cup then they must be getting something more for their investment than just ticket sales, media revenues and jersey sales. The Canucks are a profitable team. I suspect that they'd be a lot more valuable an asset if they won the Cup.

The league goes to where teams can be sustained? Perhaps you could explore this point for the rest of us.

regards,

G.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Atlanta would have never been moved north of the border if not for the increase in the Valuation of the Canadian dollar. It was at parity when the team moved back. When the Jets moved south the dollar was at or near 65 cents.

Phoenix would have been almost assured of a move, if not for the City council to approval of huge concessions. Interesting note that the team gained a name chance, even though they did not move.....

The move of the Stars was purely cash, moving it to the 6th largest economical sector in the states. They only realized how much it damaged grass roots hockey much later in the US. Thus once again awarding a franchise to the hotbed of American hockey.

The move of Hartford to Columbus 8X times population. Not including nearby populations

Quebec to Colorado 5X population and currency almost double in valuation.

This is a fun topic. Something to keep us busy til training camp.

I forgot some of the other points and am too tired to tackle them at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Atlanta would have never been moved north of the border if not for the increase in the Valuation of the Canadian dollar. It was at parity when the team moved back. When the Jets moved south the dollar was at or near 65 cents.

Phoenix would have been almost assured of a move, if not for the City council to approval of huge concessions. Interesting note that the team gained a name chance, even though they did not move.....

The move of the Stars was purely cash, moving it to the 6th largest economical sector in the states. They only realized how much it damaged grass roots hockey much later in the US. Thus once again awarding a franchise to the hotbed of American hockey.

The move of Hartford to Columbus 8X times population. Not including nearby populations

Quebec to Colorado 5X population and currency almost double in valuation.

This is a fun topic. Something to keep us busy til training camp.

I forgot some of the other points and am too tired to tackle them at this point.

this guy knows whats up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you watch the playoffs this year?

The refs weren't very discriminating as there were plenty of bad penalties going around.

Many Canuck fans, much like JFK and Lunar Landing conspiracy theorists, will always want to believe though.

there's no doubt boston and Chicago are league favorites but we aren't black listed either...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason Jersey had to win the Cup was when Wayne Gretzky called out their franchise. When Gretzky did that the league was being called out for weakening the league with expansion franchises. circa 1983.

Of course New Jersey was awarded the All-Star game next season to try give the league more credibility.

But Jersey sucked for quite a few more years.

After the Koharski incedent, New Jersey said they were shortchanged for many years afterwards, while Ziegler was still NHL president.

Three short years after Ziegler was gone, they win the cup, after being barely ousted the year before by Messier's Guarantee.

You don't think there is Modus Operandi in the league?

Bettman. Joined NHL feb 1993. Last Canadian team win

1994 NY Rangers win for first time in 54 years

1995 New Jersey expansion team wins.

1996 Colorado gets the Nordiques and wins the cup first year they move

1997 Detroit wins first time since 1955

1999 Dallas (formerly Minnesota in guess what year......1993)wins

1995 Through to 2004 previous champs from above all repeated (NJ, Col & Det)

2004 Expansion team wins over Canadian team

2005 Cancelled

2006 Expansion team wins over Canadian team

2007 Expansion team wins over Canadian team

Pittsburgh almost pulls repeats after almost having the team bankrupt out of the League

Chicago, LA, Boston All win after 40 year long droughts (through to current again repeat winners of those American markets)

If you don't think the NHL and ref's conspire to fix the outcome for particular American franchises....You just have to look at the list of Winners and how they correlate with Bettman's vision for the NHL.

How best to manipulate the outcome. Someone who is under your control and your payroll, the Ref's.

With the science of sport, they know exactly how to dictate the outcome of games. Perfect non-calls. Momentum sapping calls. Once the result is close to what they need, then the even up calls come.

I cannot count how many games I have watched where the game is out of reach and then the make up calls come out to balance the stats.

Sure some of you make think I am nuts, but the facts are there if you go looking for them.

What a load of horse manure.

The Ranger won the Presidents Trophy 11 points ahead of second. They were the best team in the league all year long. But it was Bettman. Sure.

NJ won in '95 because of a 12 year old Gretzky comment? Gretzy's comment came after the Oilers scored 13 goals against the Devils and they had lost 28 of their first 30 games. The worst start for a franchise in more than 50 years. When Jersey won in '95 they had a future HoF goalie, 2 future HoF d-men, and played the choking defensive style Lemaire loves so. In the latter half of the decade they added some great offensive players to be one of the eastern powerhouses.

The year before the Av's won the Nord's were considered one of the eastern favorites. In the 95/96season with Sakic and Forsberg they were only the second highest scoring team in the league with Roy backing that offense in net. Sure, it was Bettman.

The truth is from the mid 90's through to the salary cap being imposed Detroit, Colorado, and Dallas were the highest spending teams in the west by a good margin. In the 01/02 season the total salary of AV's first pp unit plus Roy alone was higher than our entire team. Dallas and Detroits payroll was comparable to the Av's. I can't imagine them winning cups without Bettmans help with the shabby teams they had. Although once Dallas won their cup they started shedding salary because they were losing money.

None of your examples are valid at all imo.

When Bettman was hired the owners gave him two key mandates, expand the league and acquire a national US TV deal. The reason that was a hard sell was the NHL wasn't really a national sport, it was primarily a northern US game. It meant expanding into non-traditional markets to make it a national game.

Now if Bettman was interfering to have US winners why would he choose Chicago, Boston or Pittsburgh? Wouldn't Phoenix, Columbus, Florida, and Atlanta have made far more sense as opposed to those well established markets? Had any of those teams won with their crappy rosters you may have a case for conspiracy. But crying conspiracy when good teams win is just plain stupid.

Sorry but the teams that have won have just been damn good teams. End of story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boston got away with a lot of crap during the playoffs. Chara should have been suspended for the rest of the season for his hit on Pacioretty.

Because? I'll keep giving the same answer to this: Players had been run into that stanchion for decades. The worst possible spot on the ice to deliver a hit. Unfortunately it took this kind of injury for the league to actually do something about the problem. Any place else on the ice and it would have been a run of the mill rub out along the boards. There was no intent there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have some bad calls. I can't say for sure we get it worse without watching every game every team plays. But that Burrows penalty in Nashville blows my mind. I doubt it has anything to do with that Nielson stature considering the incident is what, 30 years old?

It doesn't. It had to do with Burrows faking injury to draw a major penalty in a previous game where Augier felt Burrows had made him look bad. Short memories here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rome takes out Horton less than 2 seconds after he passes the puck (time it, I did) and receives 5 min for interference, a 10 minute misconduct, and the longest suspension in NHL Finals HISTORY - 4 games.

Considering the allowed time for delivering a hit after a player passes is .5 of a second the hit was late by a country mile. The puck was passed and onto the other players stick going into our zone before Rome even made his move to deliver the hit. Sorry, but earned that suspension.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

".....anybody that's played this game knows that you have to make a decision in a fraction of a second. He's engaged in the hit. I don't know how the League could come up with that decision, really." AV comments upon the Rome hit ruling,the longest suspension in SCF history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nuts?

I think you are spot on with your analysis.

Like they say, what has been seen cannot be unseen.

Do you guys even watch hockey????

Detroit cup wins - they were by far the best team in the league and hall of famers on their team (Lidstrom, Yzerman, Hasek, Fedorov, Larionov)

Colorado with Sakic, Forsberg, Roy etc - as above

Chicago - By far the best team the years they won

Pittsburgh - By far the best team the year they won

LA- did you even watch how that team played hockey!!! As above

Boston - simply because people are butthurt that yes they got away with goonery vs us (and I can't deny it, heck if we got the same reffing Montreal did last year, maybe we'd have a cup. But at the end of the day, if you're up 2-0 in a series and have a game 7 at home (where you don't even show up), well you don't deserve it, and in game 7 the refs let them play).

NJ - the years they won, best damn defensive team in the league with one of the best goalies in history in his prime (Brodeur, Stevens, Neidermayer, etc)

This idea that bettman is rigging the league is garbage....

End of the day, the best teams have won year in year out....and for whatever reason they have been American...

Is it Bettman's fault that Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Toronto (until the last year or so) have sucked for a decade or more? Or their management?

Is it Bettman's fault the Canucks didn't show up in game 7? Hey didn't the Canucks beat a number of American teams to get to the finals? or was that also part of bettman's grand plan, to distract the great conspiracy minded folk!

lol....

COME ON MAN!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

".....anybody that's played this game knows that you have to make a decision in a fraction of a second. He's engaged in the hit. I don't know how the League could come up with that decision, really." AV comments upon the Rome hit ruling,the longest suspension in SCF history.

A coach defending his player? Gadzooks! Unheard of!!!

Horton missed the rest of the series. Rome missing the rest for a dirty hit seems fair enough. The fraction of a second Rome had to make the decision was well after the puck was already passed. Rome chose to take Horton out because he was going to blow right past him at the blue line. It was a cheap shot that deserved a suspension.

Had that same hit been delivered on a Canuck you guys would have been calling for a lifetime suspension.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rome missing the rest for a dirty hit seems fair enough. The fraction of a second Rome had to make the decision was well after the puck was already passed.

It wasn't a dirty hit. It was 1.5 second after the pass. I remember getting into an argument at the time and counting frames to time it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A coach defending his player? Gadzooks! Unheard of!!!

Horton missed the rest of the series. Rome missing the rest for a dirty hit seems fair enough. The fraction of a second Rome had to make the decision was well after the puck was already passed. Rome chose to take Horton out because he was going to blow right past him at the blue line. It was a cheap shot that deserved a suspension.

Had that same hit been delivered on a Canuck you guys would have been calling for a lifetime suspension.

Not me. It was barely illegal let alone "dirty".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A coach defending his player? Gadzooks! Unheard of!!!

Horton missed the rest of the series. Rome missing the rest for a dirty hit seems fair enough. The fraction of a second Rome had to make the decision was well after the puck was already passed. Rome chose to take Horton out because he was going to blow right past him at the blue line. It was a cheap shot that deserved a suspension.

Had that same hit been delivered on a Canuck you guys would have been calling for a lifetime suspension.

No, we would not be calling for a lifetime suspension except for maybe one frothing fan in the corner. It was one of the stupidest suspensions ever given out when measured against historical and present finals discipline. When Keith hit Sedin and Raymond's back was broken we just wanted comparable justice to what was done to us. Even one stinking playoff game for each would have been something.

You would have to agree that Rome's hit was the worst foul in finals history for your argument to have weight. Is that what you are claiming?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe it's against us.

I don't think the league is so much anti-Canuck as it is more pro certain teams. You are a darling or you are not.

I also think the league doesn't like it when we go off script. See LA is a team that plays a hard in your face style and gets their calls based off that perception while the Canucks gets to kill seven minute powerplays for doing the same thing. We are not the only team that has that problem but we are not a darling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, we would not be calling for a lifetime suspension except for maybe one frothing fan in the corner. It was one of the stupidest suspensions ever given out when measured against historical and present finals discipline. When Keith hit Sedin and Raymond's back was broken we just wanted comparable justice to what was done to us. Even one stinking playoff game for each would have been something.

You would have to agree that Rome's hit was the worst foul in finals history for your argument to have weight. Is that what you are claiming?

Keith got five games for his elbow. Raymond initiated contact they got tangled and their momentum carried them into the boards. I didn't think there was any suspendable offense in that incident.

Rome's incident was blatant. As much as I didn't like losing him for four games I think he deserved it. I don't care if it was the finals. Hortons injury isn't less because it's the finals is it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe it's against us.

I don't think the league is so much anti-Canuck as it is more pro certain teams. You are a darling or you are not.

I also think the league doesn't like it when we go off script. See LA is a team that plays a hard in your face style and gets their calls based off that perception while the Canucks gets to kill seven minute powerplays for doing the same thing. We are not the only team that has that problem but we are not a darling.

It wasn't the first time a seven minute pp was given a team even if it is rare. But when you instigate a fight and the other player doesn't fight what will the penalty be? Five for fighting and two for instigating. There's a difference between playing "in your face" hockey and instigating a fight with and unwilling combatant.

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...