Markus Alexander Cody Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 A Cup win is a Cup win. End of story. If lil losers and whiners and haters wanna say it doesn't count, we can always counter them by saying, a win is a win regardless. I'm not desperate for a Cup, I'm just saying, a win is a win regardless of how many games are played and how it's won. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c00kies Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 I think this would be bigger deal if we were a brink team, like the Leafs. Everyone knows that we are going to make the playoffs, so it doesn't matter how long the season is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sully2Cool Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 I would rather have a 40 game Season then No Hockey at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEMAN91 Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 If you have been following the last couple seasons, you know it's dont mean jack! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max-a-Million Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 Watching the NHL under Bettman is like watching WWE anyhow. The whole "goon squad" standard that the NHL has adopted under Bettman's form of entertainment plan is nauseating at best. Bring on 40 games or whatever and a playoff season. It's equal ground for all teams so why would anyone complain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 Seriously? Who cares about that? I bet the '95 NJ Devils didn't care at all about the shortened season when they won. I just want hockey. The sooner the better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 It will be a legit Cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucksnhl Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 Who would want to bite a bullet? But seriously it doesn't matter how we get the Stanley Cup, as long as we win one already.. EDIT: Also, for example, the Miami Heat won a championship with a shortened season, but still silenced the critics for a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Common sense Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 I bet you no one cares NJ won theirs in 1995. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck nit Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertuzzi Babe Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 The Flames have a Cup and the distinction of successfully dealing with Messier and Gretzky while the Canucks pretty much sucked. How many Flames from that Stanley Cup winning era were inducted into the HHOF? The Canucks? Lanny Mac Donald Joe Mullen Joe Nieuwendyk Al MacInnis Cliff Fletcher Badger Bob Johnson Bearcat Murray Doc Seaman-builder Harley Hotchkiss-builder Frank Griffiths and Roger Nielson represent the Canucks from that era. Not one player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoneypuckOverlord Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 A shorten season will benefit the real good hockey clubs. Like the Canucks. A long season can tire a team out, and risk injuries. Of couse this applies to everyone. NOt really. For example, a bad team, healthy or not, is still a bad team, no matter what. however a good team, can be effected by injuries witch will effect the teams performance. A bad team. loses 1 to 2 of their key players, their still a bad team. A real good team loses 1 to 2 of their key players. All of a sudden, they are from a real good team to just an average team so they are greatly effected. I will love to take a shorten season. Our chance of winning the cup goes up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primus099 Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 The Flames have a Cup and the distinction of successfully dealing with Messier and Gretzky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmotamed Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 I don't think anyone would knock Brodeur and the Devils on winning in 1995. And if people wanted to, even with a full season, they could still find a way to hate... So my answer to you is, yes, go for the cup, without a doubt! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuckZ#1 Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 The Stanley Cup isn't won in the regular season, so the number of regular season games almost has no significance. The playoffs will still have 16 teams competing for the cup, and you will still need 16 wins to become champs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpt Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 every team has an equal chance at it. i have never called New Jersey out for their cup win in 95. bring on 40 games Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodee Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 Surely it could be argued that it is even harder to win it on a shortened season when no one has the excuse of fatigue. It even gives the "lesser" (teams without great depth) teams a better chance. A win is a win in my book and quite honestly I wouldn't give a flying puck what other teams fans thought. They would be just as happy to win it on a shortened season I bet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hudson bay rules Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 Well, no matter how we win the cup there will always be detractors so 40 games and a cup is fine with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodee Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 A shorten season will benefit the real good hockey clubs. Like the Canucks. A long season can tire a team out, and risk injuries. Of couse this applies to everyone. NOt really. For example, a bad team, healthy or not, is still a bad team, no matter what. however a good team, can be effected by injuries witch will effect the teams performance. A bad team. loses 1 to 2 of their key players, their still a bad team. A real good team loses 1 to 2 of their key players. All of a sudden, they are from a real good team to just an average team so they are greatly effected. I will love to take a shorten season. Our chance of winning the cup goes up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobLoblaw Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 Question Fellow Canuckers: Would your rather win a cup on a 40 game season and hear forever about how we really didnt win a legit cup cause of it from EVERYONE, or would you rather just bite the bullet and let this season go and hope for a full 82 game schedule to win it all!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.