crobro
Registered User
- Aug 8, 2008
- 3,873
- 720
did anyone see him play after 7 years removed from the game.did he contribute.
One thing I remember about that time was reading that some of the Leaf players thought that Brewer had been planted by Punch Imlach to spy on them. Such was the state of paranoia around the Leafs in those days.
One thing I remember about that time was reading that some of the Leaf players thought that Brewer had been planted by Punch Imlach to spy on them. Such was the state of paranoia around the Leafs in those days.
But regardless, it's absolutely pathetic that the other players couldn't be professionals and leave any personal feelings aside when they were on the ice.
It was funny to see a bald guy playing as back then bald was a symbol of being old, not cool like it is today.
No kidding. Farcical. To think for even one minute that Brewer was Imlach's eyes & ears is to completely ignore his history with the club. Just pathetic.
One thing I remember about that time was reading that some of the Leaf players thought that Brewer had been planted by Punch Imlach to spy on them. Such was the state of paranoia around the Leafs in those days.
The early '80s Ballard tried to recapture the Leafs '60s magic. Traded away most of his players from a good '70s teams, Bought back Punch Imlach and a few other cronies like Brewer. Brewer wasn't the player he was 2 decades earlier. Bad idea Harold!
There are people on these boards who have suggested (and I mean people with knowledge of hockey history) that Brewer's trouble-making with wanting a union and such is the reason he is omitted from the HHOF to this day.
Brewer was far from a "yes" man. The last you would expect.
There are people on these boards who have suggested (and I mean people with knowledge of hockey history) that Brewer's trouble-making with wanting a union and such is the reason he is omitted from the HHOF to this day.
Yeah, the more I read and learn about him as a player, and person, the greater I think his exclusion from the Hall is actually an outrage. It's a little hard to hear Salming ostracized him as well, considering Salming had similar unwarranted treatment in his own direction... I think these guys lived in a bubble back then and earlier, and were just easier to manipulate.
There are people on these boards who have suggested (and I mean people with knowledge of hockey history) that Brewer's trouble-making with wanting a union and such is the reason he is omitted from the HHOF to this day.
Brewer was far from a "yes" man. The last you would expect.
And then, what Category?. Builder, in terms of cleaning up a league created scam & mess?.
With blue-and-white glasses (and especially red, blue and white) one could easily argue for that - which is why he's already in the Finnish HHOF. Even as it might seem like only a blip in his career, the influence he had in Finnish hockey (and by extension, the NHL with the influx of Finnish players that only started after his visit) was immense.
Brewer certainly had a direct influence in the development of Finnish players and their careers (like Riihiranta and Hagman) that then became the first players to make the leap over to North American professional hockey. It's easy to argue that this indirectly had an influence on the later generations - Kurri, Tikkanen and Selänne grew up knowing that guys from Helsinki - just like them - really can play in North America, while for the earlier generation it was a complete fantasy.
To me, it's easy to see a scenario where Brewer doesn't come over, things take a different route, Finland would be a hockey nation comparable to Denmark or Norway and the NHL would never have heard Tikanese or seen Teemu lifting the cup.. I'd say that's building quite a bit in the NHL context too?
But then again hockey was in good shape in different cities. What I have read about Brewer he didn´t seem to be a great tactician. His hockey was pretty simplified. Did he really bring up some new great training methods? If all Finnish hockey would have just followed HIFK´s path we would have been in problems.
From the book The Power Of Two:
"The players were openly hostile to Carl. Borje Salming, his defence partner, refused to pass the puck to him. On one occasion in practice he was cut in a nasty collision with a goalpost after some of the players pushed him. The gash to his head required the work of a plastic surgeon......According to Brewer, on several occasions Floyd Smith told him that he couldn't play him 'now' because 'those guys won't even talk to you, let alone pass you the puck; they won't come back when you're on the ice either'"
The "spy" accusations seem somewhat ridiculous considering how much Brewer has done for player rights. He's one of the last people you would expect to be sucking up to Imlach.
But regardless, it's absolutely pathetic that the other players couldn't be professionals and leave any personal feelings aside when they were on the ice. What a screwed-up organization the Leafs were back then.
Punch Imlach's comeback did much more harm to the team than Carl Brewer's.
Maybe there was some justification in the end, but I can't help but think this looks really bad on guys like Sittler, McDonald,and the rest of the team that was dismantled in the early 80s. Is that a reasonable line of thinking?