Brent Sopel hates the Hurricanes' home win celebrations

[The S5]

Did anyone claim that? There's no reason to assume the NFL's popularity is because of their "showmanship".

I'm not saying it's hurting anyone. I'm saying it's tacky and weird. It's a really lame thing to do. It's hiring a clown for a 10-year-old's birthday. Sure they can do whatever they want, but people are 100% allowed to criticize how stupid it is.

Or, you can just ignore it because its not intended for anyone buy Canes fans attending the game.

 

[Yeti of the Flow]

Or, you can just ignore it because its not intended for anyone buy Canes fans attending the game.

Ignoring things is cool if you want to, but why are you so against other people's opinions? It's really strange.

 

[garnetpalmetto]

Ignoring things is cool if you want to, but why are you so against other people's opinions? It's really strange.

I think what's going on here is that both sides are, essentially, at an impasse. Canes fans and people who like the Storm Surge like it and the people who don't like it have made it abundantly clear and the former's gotten to the point of just being tired of hearing it. Yes, people have a right to their opinions but at some point they get tiresome, especially when it comes down to a team/fan ritual that's become ingrained in that team/fanbase's culture, even if they become transitory in their duration. Personally I find the octopus tradition in Detroit bizarre, just never got Toronto's waffle throwing a few years ago, and found Vancouver's Green Men tiresome from the start. I know that my opinion on those subjects differ(ed) from the majority of Detroit, Toronto, and Vancouver fans and never found it a worthwhile exercise to harp on it repeatedly, let alone get in a protracted argument with them as to why my personal views on fandom were right and theirs were wrong. It wasn't for me, it was for their fans, so it wasn't my place to complain about it. You just let bygones be bygones, let them do their thing (or let us do our thing) and move on. There's more important things in life and in hockey to worry about than the Storm Surge, the octopi, waffle throwing, or the Green Men.

 

[ITM]

Oh I know full well I was ridiculing your comment, being nothing more than anti southern market rambling, with a bunch of meaningless filler like a college student trying to reach a word count on his essay.

And you still failed to explain HOW the celebration ridicules the other team, being that they're in the dressing room after the game and aren't involved in any way. Let alone trying to make a connection to running up the score, which directly involves the other team while the game is still ongoing. There's zero common ground between the two, but nice straw man.

There's never been a single shread of actual evidence of the team moving, just "speculation" from people like you who hate the fact a team exists in Carolina. As far as attendance goes, tell me all about "real markets" like Pittsburgh, Chicago, etc and how their attendance definitely didn't drop off badly through years of losing hockey like the Canes have endured. Or how Ottawa isn't struggling with a terrible, cheap owner who blames the fans, like the Canes also endured. No, there must be specific problems with Carolina as a market then. It's not like Lemieux had to step up to buy part of a "true" team to keep it going, and that the NHL still had to step in to stop them from getting moved.

If the "entertainment is the sport" as you say, then why is there music between whistles? Or t shirt cannons, or shows in the intermission, or noise meters? I'm sure you're against all of those as well, since the game being played should be the only thing to matter. Everyone should sit in silence for 2.5 hours to take in the majesty of sport. Sure

Your anti southern bias is painfully obvious.

I was born in Toronto but I live in Northern Virginia. My inlaws live in Richmond. We vacation every summer in North Carolina and have done so for over 20 years. My wife's grandparents lived in South Carolina and her cousins and aunts and uncles live in Texas.

I didn't criticise L.A. or Tampa or Dallas or Arizona or the Panthers organization. I criticised YOUR club. One southern club out of six? That doesn't exactly accommodate necessary conditions for bias now does it? It accommodates the potential for one against Carolina, but in full declaration, I don't have a bias against clubs located in the Carolinas. Armed with new information, one wonders if you're intellectually mature enough to recant your accusation?

Your need for there to be a southern bias to justify your unjustifiable criticism against critics of your club dancing after wins to entertain the crowd, is the only element in the exchange that's demonstrably obvious. Or would you like me to return in kind an unfounded bias that charges you with prejudice against any opinion provided from fans of The Toronto Maple Leafs?

And you still failed to explain HOW the celebration ridicules the other team, being that they're in the dressing room after the game and aren't involved in any way.

I didn't fail to explain how the celebration ridicules the other team. I provided an analogy of running up the score and celebrating in front of the opposition's bench and used words like "artificial" and "contrived", "reciprocity" and "tradition". You simply dislike the explanation provided. That's fine. I dislike the notion that an NHL club dances after it wins or performs their seconds lasting interpretation of scenes from Marvel vehicles and that there are adults who see the objective necessity in doing so. I can empathize with it with an understanding that kids love going to shows like Frozen On Ice and that there's joy to be found in audience participation, not unlike that found in European markets. But that doesn't change my honest, informed, traditionalist opinion, that it trivializes the game.

There's zero common ground between the two, but nice straw man.

In the heat of the moment, I have no doubt that Evgeni Kuzneztov doesn't mean his flying eagle celebration to mock the opposition. He's just celebrating out of sheer joy in a way he finds pleasing. For anyone that's played competitive hockey, there are sacrosanct, typically unspoken, norms of game play that are held in contempt and regarded as being provocative. Running up the score and celebrating it is perfectly within the rules in the game, it just tends to be met with scorn and usually retribution of one kind or another, either in the same game or in the next game.

That Kuzneztov or another player with similar habits intends to undermine, mock another club isn't the issue. It's simply proper sportsmanship. Sportsmanship, like manners, isn't something enforceable, it has to be chosen for it's own good.

So let's be clear, I don't regard intent as the primary mover from the Carolina side. That said, you know what a straw man actually entails, don't you?

I ask because you apparently don't know what a horse laugh is otherwise you wouldn't charge a member with one fallacy while committing another.

If the "entertainment is the sport" as you say, then why is there music between whistles? Or t shirt cannons, or shows in the intermission, or noise meters? I'm sure you're against all of those as well, since the game being played should be the only thing to matter. Everyone should sit in silence for 2.5 hours to take in the majesty of sport. Sure

Well it's not if the entertainment is the sport, it is the entertainment because the primary utility of said entertainment IS the sport of hockey and not the momentary Dancing With The Canes that schleps across the ice post-victory. If there's no sport being played, then you'd argue attendance would be there for the superficial activities alone?

Music, shirt cannons, etc...They're superficial elements directed at the fans by the off-ice faction of the organization between stops and starts of play. Between starts and stops of the thing you've come to watch. There's a reason why the play of the game isn't saturated with circus acts.

You're only sure I'm against one thing or another if you value your preferred narrative and necessary delusions over my provided statements. That preference doesn't dismantle my opinion, or others' who hold that a club, that has to compete, against other clubs, demonstrate a lack of sportsmanship by celebrating in a contrived way.

Contrived, you know, like deforming another person's opinion to the point that it no longer considers it's actual argument but requires abstraction i.e. "Everyone should sit in silence for 2.5 hours to take in the majesty of the sport." I didn't say or imply that my preference is silence. By all means, back your claim up by quoting me to that effect.

Pittsburgh, Chicago, Ottawa...Another time.

And yes...Hockey is majestic. It absolutely is. A tough lift for fans of Pantomime On Ice to get, apparently.

 

[ITM]

Your last paragraph cracks me up because you just shot yourself down. Haydar had a pretty fantastic career on the ice. Unfortunately he was never given a real chance in the NHL due to his size, but was a massive success in every other league he played in. Yet you champion Andre Deveaux, a goon who had a couple of decent AHL seasons.Using your logic about why Haydar doesn’t matter, than your opinion is even less valuable since you had no career on ice.

Wow.

Wow is right.

If anything, I championed Don Cherry. I noted Haydar's "pretty fantastic" NHL career, given the context of the argument is behavior by an NHL team, not an AHL club, and not teams in the much coveted DEL-2.

I noted Haydar's "pretty fantastic" NHL career as a necessary check against HIS dismissive attitude toward's Deveaux's opinion because of his characterization of Deveaux's career. Darren Haydar is misguided in holding his opinion as being Gospel on the basis of his NHL career over Deveaux's NHL career let alone Don Cherry's NHL career.

My logic doesn't discount a person's opinion on NHL matters as to whether or not it's valid because of the success or failure of their playing career. It's the opposite. An opinion can be perfectly valid irrespective of expertise. It's not discounted because of that expertise, but the degree of that expertise isn't a hammer without license to dismiss opinions perceived to be lesser given lesser expertise.

I championed Deveaux's right to equal consideration of opinion.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I think what's going on here is that both sides are, essentially, at an impasse. Canes fans and people who like the Storm Surge like it and the people who don't like it have made it abundantly clear and the former's gotten to the point of just being tired of hearing it. Yes, people have a right to their opinions but at some point they get tiresome, especially when it comes down to a team/fan ritual that's become ingrained in that team/fanbase's culture, even if they become transitory in their duration. Personally I find the octopus tradition in Detroit bizarre, just never got Toronto's waffle throwing a few years ago, and found Vancouver's Green Men tiresome from the start. I know that my opinion on those subjects differ(ed) from the majority of Detroit, Toronto, and Vancouver fans and never found it a worthwhile exercise to harp on it repeatedly, let alone get in a protracted argument with them as to why my personal views on fandom were right and theirs were wrong. It wasn't for me, it was for their fans, so it wasn't my place to complain about it. You just let bygones be bygones, let them do their thing (or let us do our thing) and move on. There's more important things in life and in hockey to worry about than the Storm Surge, the octopi, waffle throwing, or the Green Men.

Well said GP. To me, it's not about a person's opinion, it's that it's many times tied to a more derogatory statement aimed at getting a reaction. Lame, cringworthy, embarassing, infantile idiots, losers, can't sell tickets, your team stinks, etc....and there are some that were even worse. I get it, it's the internet where people can hide behind the keyboard and say things they normally wouldn't say to someones face, but as you said, it gets tiresome. In many cases, the comments are made specifically to get a reaction, yet the poster then complains about the reactions they get.

I used an example before. If my wife asks for my input on an outfit she bought and I don't like it, what's going to get a reaction?

"I'm not overly fond of it, but if you like it, you should keep it." or
"LOL. You look like a clown in that. I'd be embarrassed to go out in it."

Same applies here. "I'm not a big fan of it, but to each their own" rarely, if ever, gets a response. "That's embarrassing, I guess if you aren't any good and you can't sell tickets so you gotta try something, but it's sad and peewee level stuff" is going to get a response.

 

[RibFrabcus]

There's a 38 page thread and people writing essays about the storm surge. I'd say it's accomplished what was intended. As a Canes fan, I honestly do find it a bit corny, contrived, and silly. But being there, seeing all those kids and adults alike standing in anticipation and sticking around to see what the next surge will be is something else. Of course the hockey game is the most important part, but this is something that's generating buzz for the team and the fans and players enjoy it.

 

[Roboturner913]

Same applies here. "I'm not a big fan of it, but to each their own" rarely, if ever, gets a response. "That's embarrassing, I guess if you aren't any good and you can't sell tickets so you gotta try something, but it's sad and peewee level stuff" is going to get a response.

It's the "I'm not touching you" bit

 

[ITM]

These are just a couple examples of teams celebrating wins

Wasn't aware of this. This changes everything. Never understood what my club (Toronto) was doing when they did this. I'll have to keep it in mind the next time it happens.

See, I always took this as a team, win or lose, saluting it's paying audience.

Thanks.

P.S. Who else thinks what Lafleur did here was boring? Maybe miming a magic trick as "thanks" would have demonstrated a more progressive hockey moment?

 

[Unsustainable]

 

[Lurk Muller]

Wasn't aware of this. This changes everything. Never understood what my club (Toronto) was doing when they did this. I'll have to keep it in mind the next time it happens.

See, I always took this as a team, win or lose, saluting it's paying audience.

View attachment 188957

Thanks.

P.S. Who else thinks what Lafleur did here was boring? Maybe miming a magic trick as "thanks" would have demonstrated a more progressive hockey moment?

The kid behind the bench could not look more bored... so maybe him?

 

[ITM]

The kid behind the bench could not look more bored... so maybe him?

Look closer...His hands are steepled. That’s a young traditionalist arrested by the majesty of the game and the moment paying a legend his due.

 

[AjaxManifesto]

Love the celebration. Keep doing it. It’s not obnoxious and it drives the uptight set nuts.

 

[CherryToke]

The Canes should drop the pregame dress code next. That will surely rile up the dinosaurs.

 

[ITM]

Love the celebration. Keep doing it. It’s not obnoxious and it drives the uptight set nuts.

The "uptight set". That's rich. I don't think it drives the "uptight set" nuts nearly as much as the idea of it being so excites certain types of Canes' fans and their preferred narrative in light of the recent criticism of extracurricular activities.

It's like one poster babbling on about an anti-southern bias without reason to make the claim. Repeat it enough times and it just might turn into something verifiable outside of prejudice and opportunism.

It's fine though. Some like skits performed by their club after wins, some like teams saluting the fans, some are satisfied with the team skating off to the franchise's victory tune.

Now if your club starts making balloon animals along with the skits, you're entering deeply compromised psychological territory.

Curious...Wouldn't it be just as entertaining if after every loss, there was a similar show expressing disappointment? Picture this:

A forward mimics shooting on goal and raises his stick as his momentum carries him behind and around the net. Coasting, he looks back and gestures that the goalie saved it. Maybe he smacks his knee or something equally theatrical and hilarious. Then, the team slowly and kindly surrounds him to reassure the disappointed skater. Pats on the back. "Better luck next time" the faces say. All of a sudden, sticks from behind backs are pulled out like knives and in the newly formed circle of trust, the whole team reenacts the end of Julius Ceasar and prrrrresto! True entertainment, yet again!

What I wouldn't give to hear whispers of "Et tu, Brute?" after an NHL hockey loss.

 

[AjaxManifesto]

That’s a lot of writing for some fans and a hockey team just having a little post game fun.

 

[24 others]

This thread is the peak of Brent Sopel's career.

 

[Negan4Coach]

I was born in Toronto but I live in Northern Virginia. My inlaws live in Richmond. We vacation every summer in North Carolina and have done so for over 20 years. My wife's grandparents lived in South Carolina and her cousins and aunts and uncles live in Texas.

I didn't criticise L.A. or Tampa or Dallas or Arizona or the Panthers organization. I criticised YOUR club. One southern club out of six? That doesn't exactly accommodate necessary conditions for bias now does it? It accommodates the potential for one against Carolina, but in full declaration, I don't have a bias against clubs located in the Carolinas. Armed with new information, one wonders if you're intellectually mature enough to recant your accusation?

Your need for there to be a southern bias to justify your unjustifiable criticism against critics of your club dancing after wins to entertain the crowd, is the only element in the exchange that's demonstrably obvious. Or would you like me to return in kind an unfounded bias that charges you with prejudice against any opinion provided from fans of The Toronto Maple Leafs?



I didn't fail to explain how the celebration ridicules the other team. I provided an analogy of running up the score and celebrating in front of the opposition's bench and used words like "artificial" and "contrived", "reciprocity" and "tradition". You simply dislike the explanation provided. That's fine. I dislike the notion that an NHL club dances after it wins or performs their seconds lasting interpretation of scenes from Marvel vehicles and that there are adults who see the objective necessity in doing so. I can empathize with it with an understanding that kids love going to shows like Frozen On Ice and that there's joy to be found in audience participation, not unlike that found in European markets. But that doesn't change my honest, informed, traditionalist opinion, that it trivializes the game.



In the heat of the moment, I have no doubt that Evgeni Kuzneztov doesn't mean his flying eagle celebration to mock the opposition. He's just celebrating out of sheer joy in a way he finds pleasing. For anyone that's played competitive hockey, there are sacrosanct, typically unspoken, norms of game play that are held in contempt and regarded as being provocative. Running up the score and celebrating it is perfectly within the rules in the game, it just tends to be met with scorn and usually retribution of one kind or another, either in the same game or in the next game.

That Kuzneztov or another player with similar habits intends to undermine, mock another club isn't the issue. It's simply proper sportsmanship. Sportsmanship, like manners, isn't something enforceable, it has to be chosen for it's own good.

So let's be clear, I don't regard intent as the primary mover from the Carolina side. That said, you know what a straw man actually entails, don't you?

I ask because you apparently don't know what a horse laugh is otherwise you wouldn't charge a member with one fallacy while committing another.



Well it's not if the entertainment is the sport, it is the entertainment because the primary utility of said entertainment IS the sport of hockey and not the momentary Dancing With The Canes that schleps across the ice post-victory. If there's no sport being played, then you'd argue attendance would be there for the superficial activities alone?

Music, shirt cannons, etc...They're superficial elements directed at the fans by the off-ice faction of the organization between stops and starts of play. Between starts and stops of the thing you've come to watch. There's a reason why the play of the game isn't saturated with circus acts.

You're only sure I'm against one thing or another if you value your preferred narrative and necessary delusions over my provided statements. That preference doesn't dismantle my opinion, or others' who hold that a club, that has to compete, against other clubs, demonstrate a lack of sportsmanship by celebrating in a contrived way.

Contrived, you know, like deforming another person's opinion to the point that it no longer considers it's actual argument but requires abstraction i.e. "Everyone should sit in silence for 2.5 hours to take in the majesty of the sport." I didn't say or imply that my preference is silence. By all means, back your claim up by quoting me to that effect.

Pittsburgh, Chicago, Ottawa...Another time.

And yes...Hockey is majestic. It absolutely is. A tough lift for fans of Pantomime On Ice to get, apparently.

It is interesting to me that the chief ambassador of such a "majestic" sport fashions suits out of garish Chinese restaurant curtains and other such tawdry displays.

 

[ITM]

It is interesting to me that the chief ambassador of such a "majestic" sport fashions suits out of garish Chinese restaurant curtains and other such tawdry displays.

Hockey is majestic. What occasioning ridicule to that end serves (on a hockey site presumably full of hockey fans) is peculiar. For some of us, it's actually a thing of beauty, in it's first condition.

As someone else noted, Justin Williams clarified what the intention of the celebration provides according to his and the team's perspective. And that's perfectly fine. A difference of opinion is perfectly fine. Both ways.

I dont begrudge personal expression. I am noting appropriate and inappropriate behavior within the game and within the season(s), not on broadcasts or charity events, etc... And I think people like Cherry are saying the same thing, albeit whilst bedecked in bespoke suits made from Chinese restaurant curtains. Which might provide equally interesting insight that a man who dresses as Cherry dresses sees the game as something bigger than his preferences in fashion whether it's fashionable or not.

 

[ChuckLefley]

Wow is right.

If anything, I championed Don Cherry. I noted Haydar's "pretty fantastic" NHL career, given the context of the argument is behavior by an NHL team, not an AHL club, and not teams in the much coveted DEL-2.

I noted Haydar's "pretty fantastic" NHL career as a necessary check against HIS dismissive attitude toward's Deveaux's opinion because of his characterization of Deveaux's career. Darren Haydar is misguided in holding his opinion as being Gospel on the basis of his NHL career over Deveaux's NHL career let alone Don Cherry's NHL career.

My logic doesn't discount a person's opinion on NHL matters as to whether or not it's valid because of the success or failure of their playing career. It's the opposite. An opinion can be perfectly valid irrespective of expertise. It's not discounted because of that expertise, but the degree of that expertise isn't a hammer without license to dismiss opinions perceived to be lesser given lesser expertise.

I championed Deveaux's right to equal consideration of opinion.

Anyone who thinks Haydar’s opinion doesn’t matter more than Deveaux based on a handful more NHL games either never saw the two play or simply has an opinion and nothing will sway it.

Cherry is an idiot who is all about PR. Everything he says is about getting attention. One minute he is a xenophobic, the next he is in love with a foreign player. That’s his schtick and people like you lap it up.

 

[ITM]

Anyone who thinks Haydar’s opinion doesn’t matter more than Deveaux based on a handful more NHL games either never saw the two play or simply has an opinion and nothing will sway it.

Cherry is an idiot who is all about PR. Everything he says is about getting attention. One minute he is a xenophobic, the next he is in love with a foreign player. That’s his schtick and people like you lap it up.

You're free to call Don Cherry an idiot, but if you're tying the epithet to hockey, while championing Darren Haydar, you simply don't know the slightest thing about Don Cherry. Or worse, you prefer Cherry to be an attention-grabbing "idiot" (as you say) and anything he says or does will always be criticized and opposed simply because he's your version of "Don Cherry".

You missed the point of championing Cherry over Haydar in the event it were necessary to choose one hockey professional's opinion over the other simply on the basis of accomplishment. Which it shouldn't be. Anymore than Haydar's opinion being esteemed more because he thinks his 8 points hold sway over similar journeymen like Deveaux. With all due respect if you can't grasp that salient point, you shouldn't be referring to anyone as an idiot.

More's the point, Don Cherry may not be eloquent but he knows hockey in a profound way. And a man who has followed his convictions with the risk of losing his job as many times as Cherry has, isn't attention-grabbing in the manner you claim he is. He remains an honest voice. One that's hardly xenophobic. If being essentially invested in Canadian hockey in Canada for Canadians renders Cherry a "xenophobe" then surely competition between countries that are hockey haves and hockey have-nots must be excruciating for you to watch. Cherry doesn't suspend his love for all things Canadian hockey because he admires players from other countries. Again...You...should not be calling anyone an idiot in public. It's entirely consistent for a person to be primarily patriotic while supplementing love of country and sport in noting other good players irrespective of where they're born.

He's boisterous, his communication fumbles more times than not, but Don Cherry isn't a xenophobe because he champions Canada and Canadians. If Don Cherry was all about PR and all about placating today's absolutely idiotic PC culture, he wouldn't be Don Cherry.

He'd be George Strombolopolous.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

You're free to call Don Cherry an idiot, but if you're tying the epithet to hockey, while championing Darren Haydar, you simply don't know the slightest thing about Don Cherry. Or worse, you prefer Cherry to be an attention-grabbing "idiot" (as you say) and anything he says or does will always be criticized and opposed simply because he's your version of "Don Cherry".

You missed the point of championing Cherry over Haydar in the event it were necessary to choose one hockey professional's opinion over the other simply on the basis of accomplishment. Which it shouldn't be. Anymore than Haydar's opinion being esteemed more because he thinks his 8 points hold sway over similar journeymen like Deveaux. With all due respect if you can't grasp that salient point, you shouldn't be referring to anyone as an idiot.

More's the point, Don Cherry may not be eloquent but he knows hockey in a profound way. And a man who has followed his convictions with the risk of losing his job as many times as Cherry has, isn't attention-grabbing in the manner you claim he is. He remains an honest voice. One that's hardly xenophobic. If being essentially invested in Canadian hockey in Canada for Canadians renders Cherry a "xenophobe" then surely competition between countries that are hockey haves and hockey have-nots must be excruciating for you to watch. Cherry doesn't suspend his love for all things Canadian hockey because he admires players from other countries. Again...You...should not be calling anyone an idiot in public. It's entirely consistent for a person to be primarily patriotic while supplementing love of country and sport in noting other good players irrespective of where they're born.

He's boisterous, his communication fumbles more times than not, but Don Cherry isn't a xenophobe because he champions Canada and Canadians. If Don Cherry was all about PR and all about placating today's absolutely idiotic PC culture, he wouldn't be Don Cherry.

He'd be George Strombolopolous.

 

[ChuckLefley]

You're free to call Don Cherry an idiot, but if you're tying the epithet to hockey, while championing Darren Haydar, you simply don't know the slightest thing about Don Cherry. Or worse, you prefer Cherry to be an attention-grabbing "idiot" (as you say) and anything he says or does will always be criticized and opposed simply because he's your version of "Don Cherry".

You missed the point of championing Cherry over Haydar in the event it were necessary to choose one hockey professional's opinion over the other simply on the basis of accomplishment. Which it shouldn't be. Anymore than Haydar's opinion being esteemed more because he thinks his 8 points hold sway over similar journeymen like Deveaux. With all due respect if you can't grasp that salient point, you shouldn't be referring to anyone as an idiot.

More's the point, Don Cherry may not be eloquent but he knows hockey in a profound way. And a man who has followed his convictions with the risk of losing his job as many times as Cherry has, isn't attention-grabbing in the manner you claim he is. He remains an honest voice. One that's hardly xenophobic. If being essentially invested in Canadian hockey in Canada for Canadians renders Cherry a "xenophobe" then surely competition between countries that are hockey haves and hockey have-nots must be excruciating for you to watch. Cherry doesn't suspend his love for all things Canadian hockey because he admires players from other countries. Again...You...should not be calling anyone an idiot in public. It's entirely consistent for a person to be primarily patriotic while supplementing love of country and sport in noting other good players irrespective of where they're born.

He's boisterous, his communication fumbles more times than not, but Don Cherry isn't a xenophobe because he champions Canada and Canadians. If Don Cherry was all about PR and all about placating today's absolutely idiotic PC culture, he wouldn't be Don Cherry.

He'd be George Strombolopolous.

All that writing the because you like Cherry, don’t know much about Haydar and claim Deveaux is more important because of a few extra NHL games. Obviously you don’t have much to do these days.

It is cute to see the excuses you make for Cherry. It’s also cute seeing how little you know about PR.

Thanks for playing.

 

[ITM]

All that writing the because you like Cherry, don’t know much about Haydar and claim Deveaux is more important because of a few extra NHL games. Obviously you don’t have much to do these days.

It is cute to see the excuses you make for Cherry. It’s also cute seeing how little you know about PR.

Thanks for playing.

Seldom right, but never in doubt.

No wonder you come across as definitionally ignorant. On not having much to do these days. Oh...There's plenty to do. I come here when I can't sleep or I just need a break from life's demands. It's my online participatory equivalent of solitaire. I take it you're either referring to time stamps or the amount of writing in a reply. Likely with the presumption that it takes a lot of effort and time. That couldn't be further from the truth. "All that writing", lol...I take it, if your preferred information isn't Tweet-sized and provided by Darren Haydar on Twitter then it's just not information, right?

You're battling for Darren Haydar's recognition as a serious hockey personality/mind and at the expense of a point I never actually made. And this, on the matter at hand, above and against an actual NHL award winning coach whose opinion is equally valid, but if held to your inane standard for Haydar over Deveaux, should be held higher. Alas...The value of a win and a few happy mimes on skates trumps reason every time at the PNC Arena, I take it, right?

"It's also cute seeing how little you know about PR." Love the premise, Chuck. If a person doesn't endorse the Hurricanes present PR campaign involving NHL players role-playing for the fans, then that person automatically knows nothing of PR...Riiiiiiiiight, lol.

Duck-Duck, Chuck.

 

[LakeLivin]

Hockey is majestic. What occasioning ridicule to that end serves (on a hockey site presumably full of hockey fans) is peculiar. For some of us, it's actually a thing of beauty, in it's first condition.

As someone else noted, Justin Williams clarified what the intention of the celebration provides according to his and the team's perspective. And that's perfectly fine. A difference of opinion is perfectly fine. Both ways.

I dont begrudge personal expression. I am noting appropriate and inappropriate behavior within the game and within the season(s), not on broadcasts or charity events, etc... And I think people like Cherry are saying the same thing, albeit whilst bedecked in bespoke suits made from Chinese restaurant curtains. Which might provide equally interesting insight that a man who dresses as Cherry dresses sees the game as something bigger than his preferences in fashion whether it's fashionable or not.

The fact that you presume to be a definitive arbiter of what is appropriate and inappropriate in the game is what's precipitating many of the responses you're getting. You see it as defending the game. Others see it as more akin to intolerance.

Personally, before it started I wouldn't have been a fan of the concept. After seeing it in action, I love it. There may come a point where it becomes old or forced, but it's nowhere near that yet. Vive le Surge!