What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2010-2011 NHL Season Part II - Concussions Are Serious Business, Savvy?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: 2010-2011 NHL Season Part II - Concussions Are Serious Business, Savvy?

MoFan said:
Recent case in point - several Blackhawks taunted Brendan Morrison as he painfully made his way off the ice with an obvious knee injury. Hey Kaner, karma can be a *****. You'll learn. Disgusting.
Click to expand...

An instance where I would hope Toews told the offending teammates to chill out.
 
Re: 2010-2011 NHL Season Part II - Concussions Are Serious Business, Savvy?

Glad I turned this game on. :mad:
 
Re: 2010-2011 NHL Season Part II - Concussions Are Serious Business, Savvy?

collegehcky2 said:
It's unreal how bad of bounces this team gets.
Click to expand...
Bad bounces I can mostly deal with; I am astonished by how little protection Lundqvist gets from the refs.
 
Re: 2010-2011 NHL Season Part II - Concussions Are Serious Business, Savvy?

jmh said:
Bad bounces I can mostly deal with; I am astonished by how little protection Lundqvist gets from the refs.
Click to expand...

That elbow to the head a couple of minutes ago was right in front of the ref yet he just made sure Sauer didn't try to push whoever that Anaheim player was.
 
Re: 2010-2011 NHL Season Part II - Concussions Are Serious Business, Savvy?

Brenthoven said:
I don't disagree that the hit was stupid. It was a penalty, and a deserved one. What if Max wasn't hurt? Let's say he just had a bruise or something? Would people be calling for a suspension?

Given Chara's history, I highly doubt that he was thinking, "Oh, I'll faceplant him into the stanchion, that'll teach him to mess with me! He'll be okay!" Some other questionable players (TBA mentioned Avery), I'd think about their thoughts, but in the end, probably come up with the same result as what the NHL handed down (and yes, it pains me to say that, given I hate Avery and think he has no business in the NHL).

Unfortunate result (injury)? Hell yes. Fair (decision by NHL)? Yes.
Click to expand...

Here's the issue. If you want the players to take shots to the head seriously, you have to punish "unintentional reckless hits" as well as "vicious non hockey plays."

Not as long, just a couple games would get the point across, but this completely negates anything they've done to Gilles, because your average player knows he's not Gilles or Avery.

Again, they're going to end up with someone flopping around on the ice in convulsions and dying before something gets done. And after that, they're going to lose a lot more than a threat from one of their corporate sponsors. It'll be on PPV opposite UFC as NBC/VS/80% of their advertisers bail.
 
Re: 2010-2011 NHL Season Part II - Concussions Are Serious Business, Savvy?

I love how people keep bringing up Avery who I don't think has ever been suspended for an on-ice incident. The worst he has ever really done is twohand someone in the back of the legs or maybe his "accidental" bump on Thomas. The guy is a dick, but hes not particularly dirty. You want to talk about dirty players, you should probably be talking about Matt Cooke.
 
Re: 2010-2011 NHL Season Part II - Concussions Are Serious Business, Savvy?

Calgary is tied for 4th place after last night's OT win. They still have played 1-2 more games than several teams behind them so they're just as close to 10th place as they are to 4th. But they've played strong hockey since the beginning of January. No more questions about keeping Kipper and Iginla. 10 straight years of 30+ goals for Iginla, that's pretty impressive.
 
Re: 2010-2011 NHL Season Part II - Concussions Are Serious Business, Savvy?

*looks at calendar* Well, I'll be ****ed, it's been two years since Calgary has ****ed off it's affiliate and rumors circled that they would move them... must be time to do it again:

http://www.abbotsfordtimes.com/Vancouver+Canucks+move+affiliate+Abbotsford/4417306/story.html

CKNW has reported that talks are underway about possibly moving the Calgary Flames affiliate from Abbotsford to Chilliwack, citing a deal to move the WHL Bruins to Victoria, which is reportedly 70 per cent complete.

It was also reported that talks have also begun about the prospect of moving the Canucks affiliate to Abbotsford, as the NHL looms closer to having to relocate the moribund Phoenix Coyotes franchise to Winnipeg, current home of the AHL Moose.
Click to expand...

This would mark the FOURTH affiliate relocation for Calgary since 2003, with the last three changes happening every two years.
1993–2003 Saint John Flames
2005–2007 Omaha Ak-Sar-Ben Knights
2007–2009 Quad City Flames
2009–2011 Abbotsford Heat
 
Re: 2010-2011 NHL Season Part II - Concussions Are Serious Business, Savvy?

FadeToBlack&Gold said:
Aren't Abbotsford and Chilliwack about 15 mins. apart? :confused:
Click to expand...

I think so. It's a power move by the WHL (apparently the Chilliwack Chiefs are up for sale and moving to Victoria (which currently has an ECHL club))

The WHL is scared that if the AHL gets to Victoria first (since the ECHL club is already affiliated with the Canucks), their league will be weakened. And Abbotsford city residents are pi**ed off that they're footing the bill for the new rink and AHL affiliate they never asked for (somehow Calgary swindled them into building them an arena and promised their affiliation).

Putting the Moose in Abbotsford makes sense. Putting the Heat/Baby Flames anywhere in BC seems idiotic. But, if Calgary did that, they'd just move their affiliate again in two years, citing lack of local support (Calgary's modus operandi)
 
unh_hockey said:
If that hit happened on the end boards, the play wouldn't have even been blown dead.

Its hockey. Its physical. Move on.
Click to expand...
Right but a hit like that by the end boards isn't nearly as dangerous as hit like that by the stanchion...

Nobody is asking for Chara to be punished for the result of the hit. The result that should be punished is that of Chara's decision to hit him in that spot in that manner...which was SMASHING HIS HEAD INTO TO A FIXED METAL POLE FULL SPEED. Players are held accountable for keeping control of their stick, why not for where and how they hit someone?

The police thing is rather much though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top