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.

2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gurtholfin said:
I barely know who Cooke is. Again, I'm not against the Wild here.

The video tells the whole story. It's amazing to me how some can blindly defend their own players.

I said Seabs deserved a suspension from the start. I said that Bickell's knee was bush league.


Sometimes a Minnesota player will do something worthy of criticism that goes above and beyond whatever you people think is my prejudice against all things Minnesota. This is one of these times.

Seriously, how can anyone defend or rationalize what Cooke did?

In addition, the guy's now on his 7th suspension, I believe. Any idea how rarified that air is? I don't think Torres has more than 4.
Click to expand...

There isn't a single person defending Cooke's actions.
Not one, so don't go there.
The issue is 7 games for a knee and 3 for a BLATANT head shot while a similar knee receives nothing.
IMO If it's a different Wild player hitting Barrie, no one cares, not even with the injury.
But I also think even if Barrie hadn't been injured by Cooke, people would still want his blood.
Some want to believe there is no way a guy can change, fine.
It's not what i believe and I'm also looking at just this incident, especially when he hasn't been suspended in 3 years.
Call him a POS, whatever, i don't care.
I'm looking for some consistency in incidents here and not just reputation and injury suspensions.
 
Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

ya, you really showed me!

chicago is gonna win this series
 
Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

J.D. said:
patman if they did't care about head injuries they never would have changed the rule that previously somehow made cooke's hit on savard legal. i just don't agree with that.
Click to expand...

but they didn't need to NOT suspend cooke to justify the change... they didn't not suspend him because the rules didn't permit it. Plenty of room there... intent to injure... (should have been a) roughing major, etc. They did not suspend Cooke because they wanted to use it to justify the change. This is where the NHL is complete BS.

In the end, what have they changed. They look at head hits a bit closer, but other than that they're about as soft as ever.
 
Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

Didn't everyone on this board used to use "Matt Cooke" to replace a derogatory term?
 
Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

bigger issue for me is with the players. they should have more respect for each other out there than they do.
 
Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

Torres got 6 last year, Cooke got 7 now. Deal with having a dirty, effective player on your roster.
 
Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

Dude Love said:
Again...nobody here is saying Cooke shouldn't be suspended.
Click to expand...

Maybe not, but I didn't see any Hawks fan rationalizing Seabrook's hit by looking for other similar hits that were less penalized.

Had Seabs gotten 7, which to be fair was about what I expected, I would have accepted it coz that was a hellacious hit and a dangerous play. I think you'll find me consistent on that subject.

Cooke should have gotten more imo. Complete bush league play. Not even a hockey play as he only went for the knee and after the puck was gone.
 
Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

In other news, Hawks go complete derp-mode in their own zone to close out the period and find themselves tied in a game that they've dominated.
 
Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

Gurtholfin said:
Maybe not, but I didn't see any Hawks fan rationalizing Seabrook's hit by looking for other similar hits that were less penalized.

Had Seabs gotten 7, which to be fair was about what I expected, I would have accepted it coz that was a hellacious hit and a dangerous play. I think you'll find me consistent on that subject.

Cooke should have gotten more imo. Complete bush league play. Not even a hockey play as he only went for the knee and after the puck was gone.
Click to expand...

Not even a hockey play and Seabrook went for the head. Just sayin'. Like it or not, the Seabrook thing set a precedent. THAT'S why many are mad. IMO, Seabrook and Cooke's suspensions should have been reversed.

For those that aren't friends with me on FB/follow on Tweeter Machine:

Seabrook's suspension is deserving of about 45% severity compared to Cooke's suspension. To isolate these 2 instances only....he gets 30% of the 100% Banhammer, and Cooke gets 70%. Smell the BS yet?
 
Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

Most Wild fans are saying it is too much, most Avalanche fans are saying it isn't enough, and most uninterested parties are fine with it. Must have been a good call, really.
 
Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

state of hockey said:
Most Wild fans are saying it is too much, most Avalanche fans are saying it isn't enough, and most uninterested parties are fine with it. Must have been a good call, really.
Click to expand...

The Avs fans think Cooke overtook Ukraine, massacred Syria, and sank that cruise ship. All before breakfast.
 
Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

state of hockey said:
Most Wild fans are saying it is too much, most Avalanche fans are saying it isn't enough, and most uninterested parties are fine with it. Must have been a good call, really.
Click to expand...

uhhh... no, but thanks for playing
 
Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

I don't really have much of a problem with it. I see it as 2 games for the play, 5 for the way he used to play. Even though he's been a changed player for the last 3 years, I do agree that the past should be taken into consideration.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top