Reputation of Gary Suter in Calgary
- Thread starter LightningStorm
- Start date
Lunatik
Registered User
- Oct 12, 2012
- 56,247
- 8,384
I loved Suter, he was always one of my favorite players. Anything he did to hurt Gretzky was not held against him
Ace Rimmer
Stoke me a clipper.
Yeah, hitting Gretzky was like "kay, cool"
The cross-check to Kariya was like "hey, not cool" but didn't really phase me.
The cross-check to Kariya was like "hey, not cool" but didn't really phase me.
Lunatik
Registered User
- Oct 12, 2012
- 56,247
- 8,384
Mr Lebowski
Go Flames
StreakingRed
....................
King In The North
Sean Bennett
Nanuuk
Registered User
LightningStorm
Lightning/Mets/Vikings
I loved Suter, he was always one of my favorite players. Anything he did to hurt Gretzky was not held against him
Compared to the Battle of Alberta, it seems like the USA/Canada rivalry means nothing to you guys.
Lunatik
Registered User
- Oct 12, 2012
- 56,247
- 8,384
1989
Registered User
- Aug 3, 2010
- 10,388
- 3,915
Agreed. There we certainly a few high-profile players for the US but they were not the real threat - it was still the Russian machine vs the Canadian crash and bang systems when it came to national hockey pride.
As for keeping it on topic, Suter could demolish Gretzky 15 times a game and I wouldn't bat an eye. Not wishing injury, just bringing the Great One down to earth.
Lunatik
Registered User
- Oct 12, 2012
- 56,247
- 8,384
Can you imagine HF back in the 80s? With some of the things that used to happen the freak outs would be epic.
1989
Registered User
- Aug 3, 2010
- 10,388
- 3,915
Covering 80's and 90's:
The ankle-breaker, the Stevens hits, the bench-clearing brawls, the "foot-in-the-crease", Bure's flying elbow, etc.?
I would simply not be on HF I think.
I think part of the reason we're seeing a "watering-down effect" of hockey is actually because of increased media exposure. I will state it here right now that I am pro-fighting in hockey as part of the sport - but I don't love "heavyweight" matchups or staged fights, but reactionary plays are OK with me as long as it it doesn't get out of hand a la Bertuzzi "vs." Moore.
Physicality should be part of the game - and that includes fighting, but it should never include dirty Cooke-esque plays. The increased media exposure has led to a movement eliminating dirty players but has also overreached its intent and begun to slowly remove physicality as a factor in games - I like that the game is centred around speedy players, but not many are what I would call scrappy or physical. I don't believe players have to be one or the other, but in today's game, there's normally just the "smooth-skating skill players." Truly elite power forwards might become a non-existent breed by 2025 at this rate, relegated to fourth-line checking duties.
I want to clarify that I don't dislike finesse players OR promote increased interference but that rather I believe that there's an active movement to specifically promote finesse over power. It used to be that physicality was allowed to match finesse if a team didn't have enough skill, but now we are moving towards finesse versus finesse players, teams, and strategies.
Sorry for getting heavily off-topic.
TL;DR last two posts: Physicality is fine, national hockey pride was viewed differently back in the 80's and 90's, the game is not the same and it makes me sad.
Last edited:
Volica
Papa Shango
- May 15, 2012
- 21,439
- 11,112
Lunatik
Registered User
- Oct 12, 2012
- 56,247
- 8,384
Volica
Papa Shango
- May 15, 2012
- 21,439
- 11,112
I don't know if Calgary has a rivalry with anyone at this time. None of the games get overly chippy and we don't dress goons across the league anymore pretty much.
The Canada vs American rivalry? I wasn't even aware there was a big one between us? There were definitely some highlights when we played in the WJC's in the past couple years, or the Vancouver Olympics final... but apart from that; I never see the US as that big country that can shut Canada down; the Swede, Finns, Russians, and hell, even the Swiss have shown the ability to do that in the past
1989
Registered User
- Aug 3, 2010
- 10,388
- 3,915
The competition with the Americans isn't as fierce as the Russian rivalry, and I feel it's because of several factors:
1) We have similar cultures and it's harder to hate what's not so different.
Even now, Russians/Europeans (but mostly Russians) have a perceived stigma, with phrases like "Russian factor" thrown around prospects unfairly to weaken their draft position and question their commitment, or just the simple cultural differences between the West and Europe.
2) This is related to my first point. Americans and Canadian systems have similar styles of play: physical north-south game with heavy forecheck and puck movement from the defenders and emphasis on balanced two-way team defence.
It's actually kind of boring but it's very effective as the play of the unit is greater than the sum of its parts. When two teams play this style, it's not entertaining to the casual fan and therefore it can remove some of the excitement from the overall atmosphere.
While Americans have stronger goaltending and better wingers, and Canada ( who is better all-around on average) is stronger on defence and centre depth, they still play very similar styles and this results in a battle of attrition - they know their opponent too well but they're not willing to change their own style of play.
Meanwhile, European systems have traditionally challenged the Western methodology by concentrating their assets on goaltending and defence (Finland, Switzerland) or hyper-offensive systems (Russia) as a way to break through the rigid "average" style that North Americans employ. This leads to more varied styles of play and more interesting hockey as a whole, IMO, and is more visually stimulating. This difference also helps feed rivalries.
1) We have similar cultures and it's harder to hate what's not so different.
Even now, Russians/Europeans (but mostly Russians) have a perceived stigma, with phrases like "Russian factor" thrown around prospects unfairly to weaken their draft position and question their commitment, or just the simple cultural differences between the West and Europe.
2) This is related to my first point. Americans and Canadian systems have similar styles of play: physical north-south game with heavy forecheck and puck movement from the defenders and emphasis on balanced two-way team defence.
It's actually kind of boring but it's very effective as the play of the unit is greater than the sum of its parts. When two teams play this style, it's not entertaining to the casual fan and therefore it can remove some of the excitement from the overall atmosphere.
While Americans have stronger goaltending and better wingers, and Canada ( who is better all-around on average) is stronger on defence and centre depth, they still play very similar styles and this results in a battle of attrition - they know their opponent too well but they're not willing to change their own style of play.
Meanwhile, European systems have traditionally challenged the Western methodology by concentrating their assets on goaltending and defence (Finland, Switzerland) or hyper-offensive systems (Russia) as a way to break through the rigid "average" style that North Americans employ. This leads to more varied styles of play and more interesting hockey as a whole, IMO, and is more visually stimulating. This difference also helps feed rivalries.
Rangediddy
The puck was in
- Oct 28, 2011
- 3,710
- 809
I don't know if Calgary has a rivalry with anyone at this time. None of the games get overly chippy and we don't dress goons across the league anymore pretty much.
The Canada vs American rivalry? I wasn't even aware there was a big one between us? There were definitely some highlights when we played in the WJC's in the past couple years, or the Vancouver Olympics final... but apart from that; I never see the US as that big country that can shut Canada down; the Swede, Finns, Russians, and hell, even the Swiss have shown the ability to do that in the past
Our biggest rivalry right now I would say is LA, beating them the first 3 games of the series seemed to really piss them off. Not saying its a big rivalry, just that there's nothing between us and EDM/VAN
LightningStorm
Lightning/Mets/Vikings
This question is sort of off topic since he was no longer a Flame when his hit on Kariya occurred (Blackhawk by then), but since that hit occurred right before the 1998 Olympics, do you guys think there's any merit to the theory that the hit was to specifically take Kariya out of the Olympics?
Lunatik
Registered User
- Oct 12, 2012
- 56,247
- 8,384
I think anyone who actually believes that hit was premeditated in an attempt to injury Kariya for the Olympics should seek psychiatric counselling immediately.
Guido Sarducci
Registered User
Suter cross checked Kariya right in the face while he was celebrating a goal. Kariya was never the same player after that.
I don't know how anyone could think that it wasn't an attempt to injure. He was suspended for 4 games in an era where suspensions were uncommon. Today that would be 20+.
One of the most blatant cheap shots in the history of hockey.
Gritty
Registered User
- Nov 28, 2011
- 7,474
- 175
I agree. I think it's going to take a playoff series to get a true rivalry brewed up... But i'm thinking next season the Nucks and Jets games will get amped up a notch.
Sens Rule
Registered User
- Sep 22, 2005
- 21,251
- 74
I remember 86 and 89. Loved Gilmour way before he became a Leaf. Now I hate the Leafs as a Sens fan.
I can't imagine HF in the 80's! Lol!
I am the biggest Sens fan now but in the 80's it was the Leafs and Canadian teams. Such memories of 1989. Thought Gilmour would get the Smythe. I hardcore watched those playoffs.... Gilmour in the playoffs (for any team) is like the highlight of my hockey fandom. Of course there is all of that Gretzky and Lemieux!
Those Flames teams were so great. So stacked. Completely made to beat the Oilers. Salary Cap you just can not assemble those teams anymore. You Flames fans are lucky you won the Cup in 89. I had such strong stacked Sens teams for like 3/4 seasons and we never won.
I remember MacInnis and Suter well. But how about MacCrimmon? Guy was a rock. Definition of a great D. Remember him in Calgary and paired with Howe in Philly. What a player. Died in that horrible plane crash in Russia.
Anyway seems my Sens and your Flames are on the upswing. Lots of great Flames memories. Freaking Fleury. That guy was one of my all-time favorite players. What a demon force of nature. Why second fav Flame after Gilmour.
