oldnews
Members-
Posts
53,830 -
Joined
-
Days Won
186
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by oldnews
-
Good to know that Juolevi was one of the guys that got very sick - lost a lot of weight and strength - and was really set back during the outbreak. one thing a lot of us wanted to know - widely assumed, of course, that that bad coach Green just didn't want to play him.
- 373 replies
-
- 14
-
-
-
-
-
Thanks for the Cole's notes - but one point regarding Virtanen - Benning simply says that the matter is in police hands at this point and they'll 'know when they know'. the part about just terminating him instead of having to pay him/buyout - is your assumption / wasn't said. a few other liberties taken in paraphrasing/adding things that weren't said (not sure I heard any references to Tryamkin's wife - or Clark "not wanting to go anywhere" - think being accurate helps - but whatever - I generally agree with your sentiment regardless.
-
[Discussion] Ron MacLean homophobic?
oldnews replied to Bertuzzipunch's topic in General Hockey Discussion
and do you have any data regarding his 'ratings'? -
[Discussion] Ron MacLean homophobic?
oldnews replied to Bertuzzipunch's topic in General Hockey Discussion
That may be - although I'm not sure being born in 1960 necessarily made anyone 'know better'. But I'm not talking about culpability/immunity - or when they were born, in any event. I don't think MacLean needs to be 'guilty' of homophobia here to be considered post shelf-life. Does this comment qualify as 'offensive' enough to be grounds for dismissal? That's not how I'd approach it. If it were my call, his days would be numbered regardless. Like I said - I'd neither make a 'victim' of him - nor do I consider him 'entitled' to his position. My review would be that he's increasingly unentertaining cringe material. But I'm not a dictator - so do it objectively and fairly - it's an entertainment industry - do people want to listen to that? I'd be surprised if he survives his position under popular review. -
[Discussion] Ron MacLean homophobic?
oldnews replied to Bertuzzipunch's topic in General Hockey Discussion
what makes you assume 'ratings' for MacLean are 'safe'? are you talking about hockey ratings in general - that do not reduce to MacLean? or do you have specific positive 'ratings' for MacLean? I know how I'd rate him. Right alongside his former sidekick. -
[Discussion] Ron MacLean homophobic?
oldnews replied to Bertuzzipunch's topic in General Hockey Discussion
There's no need to make assumptions here - whether MacLean was referring to testing positive for HIV, or "rum" (as weak a backtrack/denial as they come) - as if anyone has ever been tested "for rum" - people are tested for blood alcohol content when they drive....but 'rum' is just an awkward reach by MacLean. Ron's contrived / fake 'explanation' just makes him look like that much more of a coward - unable to own his words/responsibility. He typically digs in in situations like this - as if he 'understands' how people could misunderstand him lol. What is exceedingly clear - is that the basis of his jab was Bieksa having a photo of a shirtless man behind him. Period. That is the material point - what he insinuates relates directly to implying what Bieksa exposes himself to as a result. Speculation about what Bieksa would allegedly test positive for - is irrelevent - the nature of the insult/trash talk relates to what a picture of a man 'tarp off' insinuates. Ron - in typical Ron fashion - seized upon an irrelevent distraction - rum - as a means to avoid what the insult really consisted of. Regardless of whether people are railing against 'cancel culture' - or taking offense to MacLean's attempt to 'make fun' of Bieksa's choice to present a shirless photo - literally everyone knows what the gist of the comment was. So - why does Ron feel the need to take a shot at Bieksa's "manhood"? I think the answer is probably fairly obvious. Bieksa is more 'man' than MacLean could ever hope to be. Bieksa has become a rock-star - stealing the show - someone who commands attention - while Ron increasingly is a declining sidekick - whose forced metaphor game - his bread and butter - is as cringe and constipated as commentary comes. Was Ron just being 'playful'? That wouldn't be my take - I think Ron is clearly threatened by Bieksa - and/or felt the need to attempt to take Bieksa down a notch. Bieksa is, after all - a Canuck - and a team-mate of Burrows - and none of the dynamic on those panels lack underlying context. Bieksa has changed the landscape. Jen Botterrill is changing the landscape. Ron is increasingly irrelevent - appealing to who? So what do you 'do' about it? 'Apologize' for Ron? Defend his 'right' to speak 'freely'? 'Cancel' him? I'm not sure - but I think the discussion flushes it out as much as any 'action'. His 'explanation' was predictably weak. I'd have more respect for him if he just owned that it was what it was. I don't necessarily agree with over-reacting to a particular incident - as was done with Cherry - who had a history imo of making an idiot of himself. There were tons of reasons to let go of Cherry - should have been done earlier - by simple review - of how antiquated / what a liability he was. Does Bieksa's manhood need to be defended? I don't think so. I think it's pretty clear that regardless of this impotent attempt of MacLean - regardless of what Bieksa's person love/sexual preferences may be - MacLean is 'punching way up in weight class.' If Ron isn't 'penalized' - does that mean he should 'man up' - and drop the gloves with Bieksa - the hockey solution - which probably would have been the general result in days gone by - if someone made a belittling chirp like that. Of course few people resolve matters that way any more (aside from hockey players / on-ice, ironically)... Bieksa doesn't need to prove himself - no need to 'answer' MacLean - probably wouldn't be caught dead obliging such an unworthy opponent. I imagine Bieksa would brush this aside - while probably also trying not to speak for shirtless men in general lol - who will probably have a range of opinions on the comments. And of course - what is the attempt to 'belittle' founded upon - who is the reduction, the devaluing - aimed at? I'm not sure it's as debatable as the politicking around it. Ron simply associated a shirtless man with testing positive for something. Generally, testing 'positive' of course - has negative implications. Let Ron weasel around his comment. It is what it is. 'Cancel' him for this? Nah. Just conduct a broader review in the offseason - of whether he's worth keeping around. My two cents would be that hockey broadcasting would be better off without him - he's increasingly 'unentertaining' / borderline unwatchable. I don't think he stands up to the incoming talent. He's had his days, his say - he's made a living off it - he's no victim - he isn't 'entitled' to his position. -
Sandin is looking like this year's Dermott..... the next guy the Leafs threw/throw in over his head, prematurely. He's been ok (good player) - and Bogosian has been good - but if you're gonna tilt the ice for Reilly/Brodie, does that leave good conditions for Sandin to succeed? Not sure. Can't imagine the Habs are gonna stop targetting him as the guy to tenderize of the Leafs blueline. But at least the Leafs don't have a 'this year's version'.... of Jake Gardiner. That might have to go to a forward this time - perhaps Jumbo - probably the worst Leaf on the ice thus far - and I'm skeptical that he's gonna 'age' any better as the tempo upticks...
-
Would not entertain dealing that pick unless if involves a (future) partner for Hughes. For Cal Foote - maybe. Forsberg - great player - but I'd consider a LW a secondary organizational need Predators I'd be interested in.... We also (probably) need at least one bottom six center. Haula expires. Richardson expires. Trenin - yes please.
-
Canes are such a conundrum. Never shoulda been a hockey team taken there. It's Carolina. They play basketball, football....hockey was an alien landing. But really like what Ron Francis did there, though... And then that obnoxious owner shafts him. And a bit of a sideshow - only outdone by the Vegas Knights. But really like that Rod Brind'Amour guy behind their bench.