Posted: 2/6/2005, 4:29 pm
Sorry, I meant to add "on paper" to the end of my last post. 
Page 5 of 17
Posted: 2/6/2005, 4:49 pm
tis' all good
Posted: 2/7/2005, 12:51 am
dude
missing the "on paper" and the rags is like
ummm
is like saying the eagles won the superbowl
and forgetting the 1960 or whatever year it was
missing the "on paper" and the rags is like
ummm
is like saying the eagles won the superbowl
and forgetting the 1960 or whatever year it was
Posted: 2/7/2005, 9:31 am
We really shouldn't be so hard on the Rags. I'm sure if they keep at it, they can do it. Yes, one day they will make the playoffs again. Lead by a a 78 year old Mark Messier.
Posted: 2/7/2005, 10:27 pm
sadly
they will make the playoffs
but it'll be when they have al montoya or that labreba kid in nets
plus fedor tjutin on d
and all those other young kids they have in the minors (they actually have some good kids btw)
they will make the playoffs
but it'll be when they have al montoya or that labreba kid in nets
plus fedor tjutin on d
and all those other young kids they have in the minors (they actually have some good kids btw)
Posted: 2/8/2005, 11:49 pm
The only thing wrong with the Rangers is they have no team chemistry. They have a team full of star players more concerned with their stats than they are about winning. I bet you the Rangers farm team could beat the Rangers themselves.
Posted: 2/9/2005, 9:01 pm
by monday, you (xaver) are sooo going to be hated by some of the people who posted here...
*raises pitchfork*
*raises pitchfork*
Posted: 2/9/2005, 10:42 pm
Posted: 2/9/2005, 10:54 pm
Montoya is the best goalie I've ever played against.
Unfortunately this past World Juniors he showed just how inconsistent he can be.
Unfortunately this past World Juniors he showed just how inconsistent he can be.
Posted: 2/9/2005, 11:01 pm
No worries. Let's just see what happens over the weekend. I still say March 1. There's just way too much to lose.
Posted: 2/9/2005, 11:04 pm
I don't think it'll happen. I could be wrong, but it seems like both sides are too far apart.
Posted: 2/9/2005, 11:39 pm
even if a deal was done soon, there would still have to be training camps and everything
which would leave what, a 10 game season?
which would leave what, a 10 game season?
Posted: 2/10/2005, 2:03 pm
28
Posted: 2/10/2005, 2:08 pm
I could go for a 10 game season. Just make each period 10 times longer than the original 20 minutes.
Posted: 2/10/2005, 2:23 pm
and last one standing wins the cup?
Posted: 2/10/2005, 10:11 pm
http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=1988656
If you just want to get the jist of the article..."NHL labor talks ended Thursday with both sides saying, 'We're done.'"
It's over. There isn't going to be hockey for a long, long time.
If you just want to get the jist of the article..."NHL labor talks ended Thursday with both sides saying, 'We're done.'"
It's over. There isn't going to be hockey for a long, long time.
Posted: 2/10/2005, 10:45 pm
bastards, i'm pissed.
i think the stanley cup should still be awarded to some team. it was created to be awarded in celebration of the sport there's nothing to celebrate about when it comes to the NHL. i say that the CHL winner should get it.
i think the stanley cup should still be awarded to some team. it was created to be awarded in celebration of the sport there's nothing to celebrate about when it comes to the NHL. i say that the CHL winner should get it.
Posted: 2/10/2005, 11:38 pm
no offence but that would be really dumb
Posted: 2/11/2005, 2:20 am
I would have meant offense when saying it. This is why you don't sleep with a miss piggy.
Posted: 2/11/2005, 5:17 pm
The NHLPA will have one more proposal to offer. They have to, or else the NHL could take them to court and argue that they didn't bargain in good faith. This would result in the court granting impasse to the league. That means replacement player hockey. I still say there's gonna be hockey. I don't believe anything they say in the media until I hear "The season is officially cancelled." Call me a fool, or what you will, but I remain optimistic.