Originally posted by notyoueither
First of all, I was replying in the spirit of the thread. Some people are making less than thought out criticisms of 'my' team, so I was sending some of the poo back down the QE II.
First of all, I was replying in the spirit of the thread. Some people are making less than thought out criticisms of 'my' team, so I was sending some of the poo back down the QE II.
Originally posted by notyoueither
Sorry you don't like it, but the comments about loser points are not really my own creation. They do make a handy stick to pick up though.
Sorry you don't like it, but the comments about loser points are not really my own creation. They do make a handy stick to pick up though.
Originally posted by notyoueither
Please tell us what it says when 1 team is 1-5-3 in abbreviated OT, while another is 0-1-12? Which record would you prefer the Flames have, and what can these records tell us if they are tortured into comparison to playoff hockey?
Please tell us what it says when 1 team is 1-5-3 in abbreviated OT, while another is 0-1-12? Which record would you prefer the Flames have, and what can these records tell us if they are tortured into comparison to playoff hockey?
I am concerned by many aspects of the Flames team and play. I do not see them as being anywhere near an elite team although I do see some pretty solid tools that SHOULD make them a solid playoff team. But a failure to win in overtime is just part of the bigger thing where the Flames have found ways to not get a victory in a disproportionate number of games in which they outplay the opposition.
This is actually a change from the last couple of years since in the past, the Flames would win a fair number of games (largely through Kipper stealing them) that they were totally dominated in. So I am very concerned by the Flames OT record.
At the same time I AM encouraged by the Flames play lately. They have been outworking and generally outplaying some reasonably good teams. When I see that I figure it will all work out
Comment