-
Posts
16,774 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
407
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by conundrumed
-
-
2 hours ago, travel_dude said:
Deeds and FF used to be big Bandwagon thread posters.
It was a fun thread.
This one is good to allow something other than P&M.
I'm happy to see less of it in the game threads.
Yup. This thread is pretty much homage to that one.
My own negative attitude hit rock bottom seeing nothing but negativity regarding BT's offseason moves so I needed the George Costanza do everything opposite.lol
Now, the Flames look great, I'm dating Keira Knightley and I made a fortune mining bitcoin.
Oh, wait. The Flames look great. I'm still waiting on the other 2.
-
5 in a row, 8-2 in the last 10.
Let's keep this ball rolling.
I only started this thread because I exhausted myself pissing and moaning. Unbelievably, really, it's worked.
We are shocking everyone (except Torts,lol).
Let's run and get taken seriously. Come what may.
-
Guessing the Isles will be none too happy with their result last night, hpefully we get hopping out of the gate and they become another team that we grind down and run out our house.
-
At any rate this season has been way more superfun than expected.
-
6 hours ago, cross16 said:
What options did he have? The pass is what drew him to the inside, he couldn't break outside otherwise the puck is basically right on Z's stick and it's an easy turnover. I don't agree at all that this is bad awareness or on Kase, he saw him coming (got his hands up afterall) he just had no time to do anything about it.
I can't really agree with your assessment. Kase was trying to poke it around Zadorov and beat him to Kase's left. He had safe space on his right. But it's Kase. He could have poked the puck and darted right. I'm pretty sure 99% of NHL players can avoid that much impact. Kase can't. It wasn't a board hit. Kase played risk and lost. Call it what it is. A huge hit on a player that always plays risk. Why do we want to protect that with more rules to protect stupidity?
I get the head injury part, but this isn't dirty, it's not on the boards, it's not a blindside. It's a player that tends to love risk, and loses at it a lot.
My question is that if this is unacceptable, how deep is this new rabbithole?
It's already close to unwatchable due to erroneous reffing and erroneous challenge rules.
-
13 minutes ago, cross16 said:
This is where I disagree and where I understand I will be on a bit of an island on this, but I'm not longer a fan of the standard where you point at the victim. There is too much evidence about the dangers of head injuries for me to continue with the same old standard of simply "keep your head up". Kase had no way to defend himself other than to not make the play and I prefer speed, skill, plays and fewer head injuries than I enjoy bit hits.
But like I said I understand this is my opinion only and others will disagree.
Full respect. I don't consider it pointing at the victim. Semantics I guess.
At this stage in your career, if you can't see that coming, you probably shouldn't be in the NHL. This wasn't a blindside. Kase has a history with this. He's not really an NHLer, so he gets injured. A lot. Can't make rules to save guys that probably shouldn't be here due to lack of awareness.
-
2 minutes ago, robrob74 said:
It seems to creek into their game when they're tired. They start to get back to their lazy D play. They had two good periods against Vegas and one bad one. I don't know if it was fatigue in the Toronto game, but I can see what you are getting at. In that case, the Flames outscored their deficiencies in the game.
Definitely expected Toronto to come out of the gate firing. 0-0 1st I was really happy with. Markstrom top 5 in every G category. I don't miss our goalies being 28th. I love me a blue collar team. Even more than star-studded.
I think the, "this period, that period, blah" stuff is more about the other team. Every team is really good, they are going to rule segments of games. Loving our work ethic. Win or lose, needed to see it. It's been years.
-
1 hour ago, cross16 said:
Well when your hot you're hot. I don't think the Flames are really playing great right now but finding ways to win. Pucks going in and Markstrom come out of the break much better than when he went in, which is great to see. 2 Back to back really good games from him so hopefully this is him entering into a bit of a zone and they can balance out the goalies a little better now that the schedule is going to get intense.
Wasn't the cleanest game and there are a few worrying trends in their defensive right now that I'm sure Sutter will want to correct but happens throughout the course of a season. Also need to give credit to the Leafs. They make zone entries very difficult for the Flames and their PK was stellar.
On the Z hit while I do think it's clean based on the rules I don't like it and that should be the type of hit the NHL wants out of the game. But based on the current rules I don't see anything there that they can use to punish at all.
I liked the game plan. We were fortunate to be at zeroes after 1 but that was my hope.
Toronto's a high skill team so hit them. Track Matthews all over the ice and limit his threat.
I thought we might light them right up by being physical. Even if Simmonds was in, they can't match that.
I'm good with the Z hit. If Kase can't see an apartment building coming then he always gets concussed. You can't make rules for guys that constantly have their head down. They shouldn't be in the league.
Rather than the hit being removed, remove the player. Can't base rules on the victim's lack of awareness.
This stuff follows Kase around. It's on him to end it, not the league. There are very few NHLers that get caught straight on like that. If you want that out of the game, what's next? There would be zero reason to have size if you can't use it.
-
11 hours ago, travel_dude said:
I couldn't resist.....
I'm gonna need 45 seconds alone and a greased out toilet roll..lol
- 1
-
1-1. Shots: T-30; C-17
4-1. Shots T-30; C-20.lol
And all the Leaf fans hate Button because he talks about the other team.
-
5 minutes ago, travel_dude said:
I would have been happy with just the Vegas win, for points in the west sake.
We had a built in excuse to show poorly.
Losing to them would have bothered me, but only becuase it gives TSN more crap to peddle.
I am not excatly sure what clicked.
We have not been winning a lot at home, but then again they were so few and far between.
How do you get on a home roll when you barely get two together.
We miss out on playing the Oilers at home in December and get stuck playing in their barn again.
Is it me or does having fans around cause the Flames to play tough.
Zaddy, Guddy, Lucic, you name it.
When we play tough and smart, we can win games like this.
I wasn;t a fan of some of our D-zone play, what with the 2 foot passes to TO players.
But we just looked at times like we were trying to transition without the extra bit of energy required.
It's fun to watch. Who expected all 4 of those points?
Big props to Markstrom. Superfun.
-
I'm not sure blowing up Vegas and TML on back-to-back is a great way to lay low, but here we are.
I expected to blow Toronto out tbh. I half-expected 7.
It's about time we destroy everyone on our rink.
How much fun is this?
- 1
-
We need 2 more. Just because.
-
Should be fun to see if we push the pace in the 3rd.
I kinda hope so, but b2b, just get the 2 pts.
-
2 minutes ago, The_Snowbear said:
We still have one period to play this isnt over toronto can comeback
What? 7-1 Flames. Seems reasonable.
-
45 minutes ago, conundrumed said:
It's the game I wanted. Physical, and the boys aren't missing by much.
Time to destroy them, I think. No?
Not to quote myself. But yeah....too much fun
-
This is how it starts:)
-
Does Calgary have a team, TSN, or is Toronto playing themselves?
Destroy them.
-
Just now, The_Snowbear said:
Guarantee sutter didnt like that period
Why? It's 0-0 against a good team that wanted to start strong. 0-0 is perfect.
The analysts are mind-numbingly pro-Toronto. Let's go Flames.
-
1 minute ago, travel_dude said:
Well, the thing we missed in our last game ahainst them was not blowing them up.
That was a close game with no scoring until the 3rd.
I suspect we get Phase 1 in the 2nd.
Phase 1 to 4 would rock worlds eh wot?
-
8 minutes ago, The_Snowbear said:
wow what a hit
It's the game I wanted. Physical, and the boys aren't missing by much.
Time to destroy them, I think. No?
-
Great hit Z. Wear them down.
-
Hi Toronto. Whatcha gonna do?
-
So far so good. Good hungry visiting team, ride out the 1st period.
Islanders @ FLAMES - Saturday 10 Feb 2022
in Flames Talk
Posted
Sorry I missed the thread tonight. Leafs lose, Flames crushing it AGAIN. Sutter's building his masterpiece. This is unreal to watch.
There is superfun, and then there's this. Unreal. Don't wake me up.lol