GrooveC Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 A question, but keeping 4 things in mind: A) Winning the Stanley Cup is winning the Stanley Cup and it really doesn't matter how difficult the road to victory was. B)Hardly anyone wants to wait until their team misses the playoffs before giving their personal critique of what went wrong and what needs to be done. C) Going into full on PANIC mode after a few bad games is not enlightened. Players and coaches need some time to prove themselves before the coaching staff is collectively fired and the team rebuilt. D) Going into a delirium after your favourite '4th liner' (that'sa metaphor) makes a few slick moves is not enlightened either. A flourishing of skill waxes and wanes, in players, coaches and in teams. Those with a bedrock of higher skill flourish more often than those who don't and time is required before the flash in the pan can be differentiated from the real deal. So with that in mind how long should the enlightened fan wait before decrying their team and readying themselves for (or outright demanding) drastic change in the club? - The Canucks 10-11 season was in my opinion a franchise best (undoubtedly top 3) - The 11-12 season showed a tapering off but not by much - This season is up in the air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NucksBrass Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 winn starnley cup with kovalev jovanovski and nabokov if mark gilklis dos thise we wil win cup an get presidient trophies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VoiceOfReason_ Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 Self proclaimed intellectuals are the best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 winn starnley cup with kovalev jovanovski and nabokov if mark gilklis dos thise we wil win cup an get presidient trophies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xWCMx Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 Can we ban NucksBrass already? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NucksBrass Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 u hav kasasian in ur profeil. he be trad for coho witch is bad trad an coho rip it up in bufalo so shat ur finger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThaBestPlaceOnEarth Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 For me, enlightenment came via the lockout. I was able to take a step back and appreciate the absurdity of being a Canucks fan in a way I never really had. I now realize that the real game is not on the ice. It's obvious to anyone who pays attention that winning is not important to this fanbase - we've been winning for so long now, a sustained run of excellence like this franchise has never seen, but our fans are less satisfied than ever, hate all of our players (not to even mention the coach and GM), and think everyone ought to be traded or fired. So what is important? What else could it be? It's clearly the ridiculous soap-opera storylines! That is now what I am a fan for. I read the Province like it's the National Enquirer. What? Tom Cruise is totally fat and losing his mind? Luongo is talking behind Schneider's back? Gillis and Lapierre got into a slap-fight? I wonder who's beach body that is? OMG it's Kesler? I thought he had brain surgery? I mean, you've got to take a step back and just enjoy the craziness at some point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrooveC Posted January 28, 2013 Author Share Posted January 28, 2013 For me, enlightenment came via the lockout. I was able to take a step back and appreciate the absurdity of being a Canucks fan in a way I never really had. I now realize that the real game is not on the ice. It's obvious to anyone who pays attention that winning is not important to this fanbase - we've been winning for so long now, a sustained run of excellence like this franchise has never seen, but our fans are less satisfied than ever, hate all of our players (not to even mention the coach and GM), and think everyone ought to be traded or fired. So what is important? What else could it be? It's clearly the ridiculous soap-opera storylines! That is now what I am a fan for. I read the Province like it's the National Enquirer. What? Tom Cruise is totally fat and losing his mind? Luongo is talking behind Schneider's back? Gillis and Lapierre got into a slap-fight? I wonder who's beach body that is? OMG it's Kesler? I thought he had brain surgery? I mean, you've got to take a step back and just enjoy the craziness at some point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maninthebox Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 Interesting topic. I tend to consider myself a fan of the game/sport first and foremost. Often I find I enjoy watching teams I have little interest in as I can focus more on the hockey and stress less about whether my team got the win. I play the game, I coach the game, I watch all levels of the game, I teach my children the game. In the end, though I have been a devout Canucks fan for 34 years, I acknowledge that my first love is simply for hockey. I have absolutely no interest in the business side of the sport. As example, I have never once thought that Keith Ballard isn't good enough for his 4.2 million dollar contract, because I do not pay him and I do not care how much he is paid. I like his style of play and his personality and absolutely love hip checks! I'd have to admit some interest in the 'soap opera for men' aspect of things. 99% of the time I come onto these boards hoping to find a good discussion about the game or the players. I usually log off in resigned disgust. Occasionally, just occasionally, I come here just to read some idiotic comments and try to come up with a sarcastic or snide remark that I hope makes some random person out there snicker for a moment. I can't decide if that is a positive or negative aspect of my personality. As to the Stanley Cup, I obviously want the team I cheer for the most to one day hoist the ultimate reward this sport has to offer. That said, I hold the (strange and likely unpopular) belief that the playoffs are not a best of the best style tournament, and so I do not base my hopes nor my enjoyment on the Nucks winning the Cup. For me, the awarding of the Cup simply signifies the begining of several months of boring-ass baseball highlights and other goofy summer sports not worth noticing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrooveC Posted January 28, 2013 Author Share Posted January 28, 2013 I tend to consider myself a fan of the game/sport first and foremost. Often I find I enjoy watching teams I have little interest in as I can focus more on the hockey and stress less about whether my team got the win. I play the game, I coach the game, I watch all levels of the game, I teach my children the game. In the end, though I have been a devout Canucks fan for 34 years, I acknowledge that my first love is simply for hockey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkeeterHansen Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 u hav kasasian in ur profeil. he be trad for coho witch is bad trad an coho rip it up in bufalo so shat ur finger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maninthebox Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 hmm. That's a difficult one to answer. I have to admit that my lack of interest in, or even disdain for, the business aspect of the sport is a good part of why I feel that way. The playoffs are a massive money grab. I acknowledge that this is important, however, and I don't really need to get into that further. Two months is too long. Way too long. This coming from a guy who has no desire to wait through summer for hockey to be played again. I feel it's anticlimactic, and the elation of each win or heartbreak of each loss tend to blur into numbness somewhere along the way. Each year I watch as many games as possible and yet can only really recall a few momentous games or even highlights. They don't call it 'the second season' for nothing. Over half of the teams make the playoffs. I cannot fathom how this signifies a 'best of the best' tournament. Watching borderline teams scrape their way into a 5th through 8th spot each year on the hopes that 'anything can happen' just feels off somehow. It demeans the trials of the regular season, to the point that (as we see on these boards) being the 'best' team through the regular season is nothing more than a consolation prize to be held up in defense of mockery when your team bows out of the playoffs. I look to last season as example. Everyone knew LA was a better team than they demonstrated through 82 games. But to me, they just didn't earn a spot among the best. Once they got in they played great; kind of like a slacker coworker who only looks busy when the boss walks by while you do twice the work. Of course, an 8th seed cinderella story makes for great headlines, so I admit to some wavering on this. Obviously the entire system for entering the playoffs is goofy as well. The contrived rivalries the league tries to generate by promoting divisional and conference games is a farce. This season will be a good example, as the conferences won't even meet until the finals. How are divisional winners with fewer points than a 4th or 5th seed qualified as 'best on best'? Did the top 16 teams really make the playoffs last year? Anyway, the short answer (lol) is that I don't know what I'd prefer. Top 4 teams from each conference, perhaps. An equal number of games verse each team during the regular season to ensure the top teams have actually beaten as many opponents as possible on their way to the playoffs. A season that means more than 3.3 billion dollars in revenue. A play-in wildcard game for the bubble teams. A true top v bottom elimination format. Who knows, who cares? I'll still watch, I'll still love it, I'll always wonder if a gold medal means more or less than a silver chalice. And I'll cheer just as hard for those nine year old kids who finally win their last game of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jester13 Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 A question, but keeping 4 things in mind: A) Winning the Stanley Cup is winning the Stanley Cup and it really doesn't matter how difficult the road to victory was. B)Hardly anyone wants to wait until their team misses the playoffs before giving their personal critique of what went wrong and what needs to be done. C) Going into full on PANIC mode after a few bad games is not enlightened. Players and coaches need some time to prove themselves before the coaching staff is collectively fired and the team rebuilt. D) Going into a delirium after your favourite '4th liner' (that'sa metaphor) makes a few slick moves is not enlightened either. A flourishing of skill waxes and wanes, in players, coaches and in teams. Those with a bedrock of higher skill flourish more often than those who don't and time is required before the flash in the pan can be differentiated from the real deal. So with that in mind how long should the enlightened fan wait before decrying their team and readying themselves for (or outright demanding) drastic change in the club? - The Canucks 10-11 season was in my opinion a franchise best (undoubtedly top 3) - The 11-12 season showed a tapering off but not by much - This season is up in the air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.