Fight for Freeform said:
I was gonna mention that about McCarty. I can understand Hatcher and Whitney, and while I like both players, Hatcher did play well when he did...
Surprised no one called me out on this typo. It's supposed to be "DIDN'T play well when he did...".
calder said:
Whoa, hating the Flames is one thing, but anyone who thinks the Canucks/Flames was anything other than one of the most exciting 7 game series in decades is just crazy. Now I know not to bother arguing with you! :lol *fond memories of game 6, when a 4-0 Canucks lead was almost wasted single-handedly when bishoptl angered Hockey Jesus with his blasphemous christmas-tree photoshop*
The difference between you and "The Internet" is that he watched hockey, while you watch the scoreboard.
There was plenty of drama during last year's playoffs. But the actual hockey itself wasn't that exciting. Of course, when the drama and tension get high (CGY/VAN series for example) each potential chance is certainly exciting, but seriously, I encourage you to pick up the NHL Network and watch the playoffs from 7-15 years ago, and you'll see that the pace, grittiness, emotion, drama, etc. were all on 5th gear. Not just the drama.
I hope you had fun though, Calgary did the unthinkable and it must have been a great ride for it's fans in other parts of Canada (because the ones in Calgary don't know hockey). It's just that apart from some drama...it was hard to watch.
I can honestly say that while I was stuck at the Uni, I kept track of some of the games over NHL.com and I didn't feel like I was missing out on anything. All I needed was the score as the pace of the games were too boring to watch. Plus, with the Flames, it was just frustrating to watch them get away with so much obstruction and clutching and grabbing.
Wings open to the Blues? Who thought of that? All other matchups make sense...I guess they had to do this. I was hoping a matchup against Chicago so that the league leaders would be all Wings after the first day of games.
