I'm giving my honest analysis of what I saw watching the game tonight. I thought it looked like fatigue was a major factor. You're free to disagree with that, though I don't think any thinking individual could dispute it, but I do resent the fact that you're questioning my motives and character for saying it.
Lighten up Francis. I simply disagree with your assessment based on the fact that the Canes were more rested than Tampa. So based on that, it comes across as making excuses for the loss saying it was due to fatigue. If you resent that I disagree with that and feel it's questioning your character, well, that's your problem, not mine.
Look, I have no idea if it's fatigue, confidence, or whatever, but IMO, it "SHOULDN'T" be fatigue based on the fact that Tampa played last night and the Canes were rested. And although I never played at nearly the competitive level as NHLrs, I know for a fact that there were just some nights where we didn't have it, and it had nothing to do with fatigue. Over the years, this team has laid more eggs than I care to remember, so if they want the benefit of the doubt, they need to earn it. Otherwise, I'm more likely to chalk it up to more of the same vs. using fatigue as an excuse.
Even if the players / coaches state it down the road, I don't buy it.
EDIT: and oh, I love that you complain about me questioning your character but throw the little backhanded insult about any "thinking individual couldn't dispute that" (which by inference, is saying that I'm not a thinking individual). Nice.