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

189lb enforcers?

Members
  • Posts

    9,269
  • Joined

Everything posted by 189lb enforcers?

  1. I have one strike left before a ban, Deb. If I ever want to cash it in, you can bet it will spent be during a discussion with you. I’m not interested in anything you post, you know that. I don’t care about or read anything you say on here and since I can’t put a Mod on ignore... Go away.
  2. I really hope Podz is a character leader and not a clone of Horvat’s either. The team needs an identity so badly. These distractions, dating back to the Cooke days, then the biting and hit-pulling crap... then the power-choke slam of the superstar, skinny rookie... Edler... you know, I’m just done with it. JB was apparently drafting character guys, well, who? Gaud? McCann? I don’t know if it’s getting better lately, but that’s not being mentioned enough lately. Where is the character? I was hoping for a massive, character game from them tonight, but it will be tough now, and really, is anyone imagining themselves having the stomach to watch any of what the media will present between whistles and periods on the Canucks? I’m here for the sport and this joke of a team, but man they make it hard sometimes!
  3. Well, oh my #@$&... This will be nationwide. Will this team ever stop being a circus act?
  4. Bandwagoner. lol j/k You and the other JV user names better run for cover... Orca doesn’t want to associated with you. Suspension incoming in ... 3... 2... 1...
  5. I’m not at all for censorship, but appreciate where you’re coming from. ... When I see the media release which rather explicitly separates Orca from Jake, because of an allegation, I am forced to realize that something like that, is what ruins peoples lives, not us, gossipers. The Canucks have essentially left Jake out in the open for the vultures. It happens all the time. An allegation happens and then the person who it’s made against is treated like a disease until the court stuff is over. And what happens when it’s not true, or there’s no conviction? It’s incredible how we can treat a person as guilty and get away with it like that, despite the law. I’d like all predators evaporated, most definitely, but I wonder how many times these types of allegations are erroneous, malicious or worse. How can Orca or any other employer get away with what amounts to, we don’t want to be associated with someone associated with something that is unproven, because it’s so disgusting...? Regardless, switching gears, the Virtanen family will be in hell and that’s going to be brutal for them. I really hope Jake is just a dirty boy, and not a predator.
  6. Hmmm, I’ve heard... mostly on here... McCann had character issues. Gawd did too. Maybe Jake does. Videogame gate? JB drafts character... ? Not looking so good.
  7. Just remember, you are innocent until proven guilty... Not. Consider what is happening here an imagine if it were yourself. This info might all be true, but sometimes it’s not, which is an aside I’m making, not defending Jake.
  8. You’re right, and I recall us discussing this before. I think that the best way to start to entice back that kind of community knowledge is to get some new moderators who are capable of leading or and least engaging in those kinds of threads or ideas. Why I say this would be a great place to start is because I think that the capacity of a moderator to promote key ideas and behaviour on here is paramount to changing the culture. A brilliant communicator like oldnews, with showings from others could definitely provide value here beyond feelz and emocons, but I think it has to start at the top. The mods have always done a great job to be here to manage content and I’m sure would welcome some new blood, especially if it was game-spilt blood. Currently, the community values praise and that type of creed more than it does anything else. Threads like you’ve suggested could cultivate a different image and approach here for sure. Banter and style is also fun and we need our mascots, but the forum has lost itself for the most part, IMO. I think it has to do with a form of censorship of dissenting ideas, opinions and other posts, deemed as negative. I mean, we were all there to see it, no sense beating around the bush. I have one strike left before the ban hammer, so not mod material, haha, but we should definitely embrace all serious viewpoints on the Canucks in Canucks Talk. Not just happy ones. Those kinds of threads once existed, but weren’t especially needed either because there was enough embedded balance and substance to some posters’ work. It would be neat to have a technical thread. The Forum is pretty much a desert these days, except where controversy and existing rivalries get to artificially fill pages with squabbling or worse. What the hell happened here, guys? You can see the culture in the upvoting in the Forum. It was especially troubling if and when the site mods/admin were involved in quelling others’ in what appeared to be an concerted effort to keep the positivity and hype machine alive here. Recently, it’s swinging and I hope it swings back. Rough Game, CDC. Get well soon.
  9. Captain Horvat time. Miller Time. I think we’ll see character this time. They’re due. I don’t care about the W, I rarely do since the days of when they’re were ridiculous sissies, I just want them to play like Linden would have and carry the flag of the V with guts.
  10. You are amongst those 3 posters which I’d considered when I made a nearly identical post.
  11. Always a good read/post from you, sir. Maybe you responded already in the thread to rate the job TG has done as HC, I haven’t seen it yet, so I’m curious what you’d say. Ultimately, I am not interested in what posters think on here, but rather how they think, which is why I made the post to which you responded. As you will see in the thread, there is almost zero, as in an embarrassingly big nothing of collective knowledge, being posted in here in regards to an informed assessment of the HC duties. So far, this is what’s here: “developing young players” ”timeouts” “line combinations” I don’t know bud, does that strike you as a “knowledgeable fanbase/community”? We used to be here. But then came the “hate” purge. We rounded up those critical posters and minus’d them into oblivion, then dog-piled the rest, which IMO was seemingly an administrative function. Pretty tough to prove that now, but look around. Where are those posters today? Instead, today, we have our resident super-homers setting the tone like a cartoonish mascot or something. The seriousness which used to be here to balance that part out is gone. So threads like these are pretty dry. I’m not trying to set myself up as some hero mind here, not at all. I just wish we had a better mixture of posters who knew what they were saying because they did it themselves, or at least have some relevant exposure, rather than these emotional or baseline arguments. Not too long ago here there were ‘joke threads’ to mock ourselves named things like “ I like Pyatt because he has pretty eyes”. I miss that level of acknowledgment of how serious some posters were when we could openly mock uniformed opinions. Today, IMO, we are doing the opposite. We’ve seen a culture shift on this site in the past oh maybe 7 years or so, which resulted in a purge of unpopular opinions and posters who used to frequent these forums who were experienced hockey people and ex professionals. It often feels like we’ve replaced that knowledgeable with your average, never played, never coached, never anything posters who are here to cheer for the Canucks more than they are to discuss them, well, with any seriousness anyways. Fine, but the balance is gone and perhaps we should consider how the community is perceived by viewers from wherever who should quickly discern that this is a place to cheer, not to be serious. IMO, it’s a shame and maybe some new moderators could entice back some of those who’ve been minused away, etc. For a few years here, it’s been awful, but in the past few months it’s seems to be less dog-piling on serious, critical posts of the team, mostly at the management of it, such as this thread attempts to do. Hate, quite the word to describe the way a fellow die hard fan feels towards their team, has been supported here so much now that we have a community vernacular which labels critical thought as hate. Incredible. This is how far the knowledge-pendulum has swung over to the side of whatever the puck it is in here now. Sign-of-the-times, I know, but wow, I think we need some new representation here, from those who’d actually post something insightful for us goons to read in a post meant to describe why they think Greener is a good HC. Line combos? Bring back the self-hating trolls and whatever else the site’s chased away in its attempt to rid itself of “negativity” before CDC flips over on its side from being so ridiculously unbalanced these days (though it’s just stating to improve). Had there been even just a few posts in this thread which spoke to an assessment of the HC of the Canucks, I’d been satisfied and not need to ask the obvious question; what does TG do well as HC? By what metric? I think that’s a tough assignment. It’s probably much easier to tackle his weaknesses. I just can’t think of anything at all that he does better than any other HC. If I do, I’ll post it. I hope someone does, and backs it up, so I can learn something, which is what first got me addicted to coming on here, way back.
  12. “Nobody saw it” Probably the same team as said that last time.
  13. Thanks for keeping JB. Best stealth tank, ever.
  14. Interesting. What does TG actually do that would make you think that? You are suggesting he is in the top 20% of coaches, or something like top 6 in the NHL. Honest, non-facetious question, what would you rate your knowledge of what an NHL HC is actually responsible for, as being? Other than an obvious few tasks, how well do you, or any one reading, actually know what the HC actually does? To rate the HC, especially rate the guy in the top in the league, he must tick a lot of *boxes. I’d like someone to list them. Maybe not yourself, but it would be interesting to have to put forth a bit of logic as to showcase how well opinions are informed in such a thread/question. What is TG actually good at? (Better than other HCs?) I can’t think of a single thing. No bias there, I just can’t.
  15. Imagine if what was said about players by other players was published? Theo Fleury could tell stories. Sisters? Bahhh, that’s getting off easy. Reallll easy
  16. General question, how many regular posters here do you think could even put a name to any system TG deploys? How about for other team’s structured play or systems? I would guess maybe 3, tops. Doesn’t stop anyone from voicing bizarre opinions regardless of which side of the TG fence their supposedly on. The more emotional, the further removed from any expertise it seems too. Good times.
  17. You can make excuses, and people will. Call them facts, sure, but there’s no science that says it’s a disadvantage to get those games in with such a young group of minute munchers. The point I’d tried to piggy-back on yours with was to at least acknowledge that other teams had crap COVID luck to start their seasons and still managed to produce. To try to cancel that out with a schedule excuse though, well that’s where my interest in the subject ends. The North Division is a gift, and the Canucks responded in typical Canucks form and played down to the lower teams and up for the few decent once’s, well for a bit there anyways. Are we really going to blame the standings and results on injuries and now COVID? Anyways, great post and follow-up response.
  18. I’m not sure how bad it was, but some teams like the Pens were without their entire Dcore, etc, for long stretches. That impacted their ability to win, just like the bagged Canucks are now facing. For a long time this season, the roster was pretty much 100% healthy. Then EP went down. Lots of teams have lost their stars this year though and kept ticking. It wasn’t until COVID hit that they’d faced any serious adversity this season. That was a remarkably good run, in hindsight, but they didn’t capitalize. The Canucks had it bad, but in one narrow stretch, sick sure, but results-wise, there also were some hard hit by COVID protocol teams, who early on, managed to continue and persevered in the standings. The Canucks had their chances this year.
  19. And, somewhat similar in luck, that TO win was entirely due to Cloutier-esque goal tending. The Canucks are getting some luck, some.
×
×
  • Create New...