shiznak Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 What I'm saying is putting anyone besides our own tough guys is bowing down to the other team. They put those 3 goons out knowing that the Sedins normally would be starting. Putting any skilled players out there is not standing up for your own star players. The message was that the Canucks will not allow you to try and pull a stunt like that with our star players. My opinion is that the "get them on the scoreboard mentality" will always lose to a PROPERLY executed "physical mentality". I made the word properly uppercase because its the most important word in that sentence. Skilled teams can and absolutely have won against tougher teams. But when executed correctly the physical team will win. You really have nothing to gain from beating up a lesser opponent in a fight. If anything, it would light a fire under your opponent's ass and make them play harder. Which they did, yesterday. Why try to motivate them, when they're already a broken bunch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saskatchewan Canucks Fan Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 You really have nothing to gain from beating up a lesser opponent in a fight. If anything, it would light a fire under your opponent's ass and make them play harder. Which they did, yesterday. Why try to motivate them, when they're already a broken bunch? It was to send a message in the grand scheme of things. It doesn't matter if its Boston, Florida, or any team in between. If you want to be the physical team (that you need to be in order to compete in the tough division) then you have to consistently answer the bell. I love what Torts did. But I will say that you made some good points. Especially this last one. Although you probably don't see it on here, you probably have the more popular opinion about the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ephysdad Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 This whole thing is on Calgary. Hartley had a choice. When he saw Vancouver send out the big boys he could have easily told his guys to play the game clean and not fight. He didn't. His lame excuse that his fourth line has been hot or energetic goes out the window by his inaction. The league disciplining Torts for responding to this is akin to getting charged with assault because you hit a guy who tried to rob you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prana16 Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 If they drop the gloves and come after our players, who don't drop the gloves, what options do the refs have? Get over your paranoia. ??? paranoia.. have you watched the games? I've watched games since the 70's and i've never seen reffing that so one sided the calls as we got with devorski, i'm not claiming a conspiracy i have no idea why.. but the reality is the reality, the officiating this team sees is very odd. Get over your need to be contrarian in the face of the obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prana16 Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 This whole thing is on Calgary. Hartley had a choice. When he saw Vancouver send out the big boys he could have easily told his guys to play the game clean and not fight. He didn't. His lame excuse that his fourth line has been hot or energetic goes out the window by his inaction. The league disciplining Torts for responding to this is akin to getting charged with assault because you hit a guy who tried to rob you. It goes out the window because the right wing goon that lined up at a center said in his post game interview that their line has been struggling and that he went out there to fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNACanuck Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 Nobody should go into a situation "assuming" you know what the other team is going to do. The facts were Calgary had the option to do the right thing and they didn't. We responded, not initiated the situation. And no Calgary wasn't/isn't a "broken team". The coach and team has to go out and play every opponent like they are a contender. Ever heard of a dog backed into a corner, well Calgary wanted to prove something in our own house and it would be inappropriate to just sit back and let it happen... same people would be crying that Torts didn't respond if he hadn't prepared for the worse case situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNACanuck Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 Oops, double post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppleJack Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 On the other hand the our players could have refused to drop their gloves and let those Flames each take 5 for fighting, 2 for instigating, and a game misconduct just like what happened to us in Anaheim. Then we would have played most of the 1st on the pp and the Flames would be short on bodies the entire game. There is a choice. and what kind of message would that send not only to the rest of the NHL but to the canucks themselves other then the fact that we are weak, that we are pushovers, that we are pansies. If they had done that and not stood their ground then this crap will continue Torts is turning this team into warriors and I for one LOVE IT. Even if this does not change how the NHL and media treat us it at the very least will build character and change how the players treat eachother. If we have to become a team full of 'bullies' that doesn't take crap from no one in order to play with heart then so be it. Bring the haters on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Putgolzin Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 A buddy of mine is a fellow Canucks fan here in Leafland. He randomly met Tanev's mom recently. She said that the team LOVES playing for Torts because of how much he has their backs. Apparently, a large portion of his antics are just to get media focused on him rather than the players (not that I think that was the case in yesterdays game!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 A buddy of mine is a fellow Canucks fan here in Leafland. He randomly met Tanev's mom recently. She said that the team LOVES playing for Torts because of how much he has their backs. Apparently, a large portion of his antics are just to get media focused on him rather than the players (not that I think that was the case in yesterdays game!) I wouldn't doubt that's what he's doing at all. And it works too. How much has the talk this season been about Tortorella? Fans seem to be spending less team ripping apart Lu and the twins and more time praising Tortorella. He can definitely handle the spotlight being on him too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonfruits Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 I wouldn't doubt that's what he's doing at all. And it works too. How much has the talk this season been about Tortorella? Fans seem to be spending less team ripping apart Lu and the twins and more time praising Tortorella. He can definitely handle the spotlight being on him too. Because he's the hero Vancouver deserves, but not the one it needs right now...and so we'll hunt him, because he can take it. Because he's not a hero. He's a silent guardian, a watchful protector...a dark knight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobopan Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 Hard to tell if it was all Torts blowing a fuse or a little theatrics mixed in as well. Trying to create an atmosphere of every player and coach having each others backs. Hard nosed, hard working team. Rangers fans certainly feel that was a big reason why that 11/12 team was so successful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snucks Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 I've seen some opinions in the GDT, but I wanted to see everything in one spot. Here's my final say on what happened at the beginning of the game: Yes, the Canucks had last change, so hypothetically they could've put out their 1st, 2nd, or 3rd line, instead of their 4th. However, what Torts was angry about was the fact that the decision for Calgary to put their 4th line out was BASED ON the assumption that Torts would put out the 1st line. If that was the case, Henrik Sedin would be at center, and look back to who the flames put at center for the opening draw? A player that had only taken face-offs 3 previous times? In my mind, they knew full well of Henrik's rib injury, and were looking to exploit it right at the beginning. As for what happened during the first intermission, I don't really know what to say. So anyways, what do you guys think? (((Also, PJ Stock is a moron)))) I've seen some opinions in the GDT, but I wanted to see everything in one spot. Here's my final say on what happened at the beginning of the game: Yes, the Canucks had last change, so hypothetically they could've put out their 1st, 2nd, or 3rd line, instead of their 4th. However, what Torts was angry about was the fact that the decision for Calgary to put their 4th line out was BASED ON the assumption that Torts would put out the 1st line. If that was the case, Henrik Sedin would be at center, and look back to who the flames put at center for the opening draw? A player that had only taken face-offs 3 previous times? In my mind, they knew full well of Henrik's rib injury, and were looking to exploit it right at the beginning. As for what happened during the first intermission, I don't really know what to say. So anyways, what do you guys think? (((Also, PJ Stock is a moron)))) Well the Flames were going after Burrow's injured jaw. The CBC has other morons too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redhdlois Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 Evander Kane loved it and James Reimer said he agreed with what Torts did sticking up for his team..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snucks Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 well i guess when you get shafted by the officials game after game its going to boil over. you can only push someone so far till they push back. Torts will have a message of his own for bettman and lap dog Shanahan. booth getting crossed checked in the head and hazel not getting anything more than a slap on his little finger.7 minute 5 on 3's. it all adds up. good for torts, the league deserves the black eye for such inconsistency and incompetence!!! Thats about the size of it. Has Gillis said anything about it yet? Off course not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 Evander Kane loved it and James Reimer said he agreed with what Torts did sticking up for his team..... Any player who claims to not want a coach willing to do that for his team is a liar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salmonberries Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 Nick Kypreos getting into the act now with a highly indignant high-horse 'Kipper lecture' for Torts on Sportsnet. Hey Nick, eat a ****!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neversummer Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 OK ... I don't dare to make the final statement on this so I quote Puck Daddy in a write up regarding Tort's history and his holy santimonious attitude about a visiting team putting out their 4th line to start the game. On Dec. 20, 2011, coach John Tortorella’s New York Rangers visited their rivals the New Jersey Devils at Prudential Center in Newark for the first time that season. It was a key division game, and one that would set the tone for the rest of their season series. The Rangers, as the road team, would determine the personnel on the opening faceoff. In their previous two road games, New York started No. 1 center Brad Richards’ line for the opening draw. In this game, Tortorella opted for a different look: Fourth liners Mike Rupp, Ruslan Fedotenko and Brandon Prust. Devils Coach Pete DeBoer responded in kind: Rather than throwing Zach Parise to the lions, like Randy Carlyle did when he lined Phil Kessel up next to John Scott this season, DeBoer skated out Cam Janssen, Eric Boulton and Tim Sestito. The result? Comedic mayhem: Fast forward three months, and the Rangers and Devils met again at Madison Square Garden. This time it was DeBoer that sent out the goons: Eric Boulton, Ryan Carter and Cam Janssen. Tortorella was forced to send out Brandon Prust, Brandon Dubinsky and Mike Rupp. Dubinsky was recovering from sinus damage, so defenseman Stu Bickel took the opening draw, knowing what was bound to happen: Tortorella loudly scolded DeBoer from the Rangers’ bench, pointing and hurling F-bombs at the opposing coach … for doing exactly what he had done in Jersey months earlier. “I guess in John’s world you can come into our building and start your tough guys, but we can’t do the same in here,” DeBoer said. “He’s either got short-term memory loss or he’s a hypocrite. So it’s one of the other.” END OF DISCUSSION !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
viking mama Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 It is what it is. I mean at least Torts was honest about it. Hartley saying that he sent those guys out because they scored a goal last game is total BS. A guy with 3 FOs this season? Sure...looking for a goal. Give me a break The Flames were asking the Nucks to fight well before the puck dropped....and threw off their gloves & grabbed onto their checks 1st. That should be warranting some kind of fine to the CGY organization too... at the very least. But - these Flames are Brian Burke's team & are now under his protectective power. Clearly - they operate by a different set of rules now... as we found-out with McGrattan's free-pass from the DPS, earlier. It is what it is....but now people both in & outside of hockey, will be taking much more note of it. Time for..... CHANGE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
viking mama Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 Except they are now incredibly undisciplined. I like some of what he has done but the team seems to run around blindly a lot more than they used to. I know...it kills me that they are now leaning towards emulating the drama queens of the league... instead of just concentrating on executing an aggressively skilled game - out there. The MMA & WWE have there place - I suppose. But the NHL was supposed to be a globally respected professional sport's league with disciplined athletes, meaningful stats & standardized rules that are properly enforced - NOT just some pre-scripted madness that doubles for entertainment. Or am I wrong? Yah - not everyone on the league's BOG has the same vision for the league's future. So - hold onto your hats...a war on that Board is coming, IF it hasn't arrived already! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.