Jump to content

Wraith

Community Member
  • Posts

    743
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Wraith

  1. I was watching at a friend's house with about 15 people, everyone threw in $5 and picked a player to score the winner...I had Pommer!!! Needless to say that cash was gone immediately at the postgame trip celebratory trip to the pub.

    Similar situation for me. I had graduated UB a year earlier but was back in Buffalo for the graduation ceremony/party of a bunch of my buddies who had stayed for the 5th year. We had the game on at the party and it was so packed it was hard to keep your attention on the game. The way that goal set up, I could hardly believe my eyes. Talk about out of nowhere. That goal had everything needed to make it legendary.

  2. :unsure:

     

    Canada was assessed 4 penalties in that game (USA 3), none was for goaltender interference, so either they weren't dirty around the net or the refs weren't fair?

    Incorrect. Ryan Getzlaf was called for goaltender interference in the first period after he took out Miller with a stick to the face.

  3. I don't know how anyone can hate on Brodeur. Pretty much every U.S. goal was either a deflection or a multiple shot rebound. Canada's defense (mostly Pronger/Boyle) were pretty awful at clearing traffic and with gap control.

    While you certainly can't pin the whole loss on Brodeur, I think it was pretty clear that Marty was pretty un-Brodeur-like last night. He made not one but two horrendous errors on the second Rafalski goal. First, he inexplicably batted the puck out of the air right up the middle of the ice and then over-reacted and dove across the crease out of control only to deflect the shot into the net.

     

    Also, on the eventual game winning goal, he probably would've made the save had his stick been in the right spot rather than caught behind his left skate through his legs. He's a goalie who always seems to be in the right spot positionally and he certainly wasn't that last night.

  4. 1. Were the announcers last night the VS announcers?

    2. Are they Canadian

    3. Did it sound to you like they were saying 'American' like it was a dirty word?

    They are also the NBC Hockey announcers, which is I'm sure how they got the Olympic gig. Mike Emrick and Eddie Olczyck are both American.

  5. One has to wonder if Al Qaida will seize the opportunity. Just a big freakin target, then again Dubai isn't a country filled with infidels now is it. Rich Arab aholes making billions off oil, but not infidels. :thumbsup:

    Dubai is not a country, it's a city. The country is the United Arab Emerates. Despite the name, it is my understanding there is a significant number of non-Islamic, non-Arab people in the country.

     

    I had a friend in college from the UAE and he was of Christian-Indian descent. According to him, there was a huge number of Indians of various religions in the country. The oil industry and the development of Dubai is a big draw for highly educated, highly technical Indians. The culture, at least in the region he was from, is extremely Westernized, as you can tell by looking at Dubai. Take that for what it is worth.

     

    So yes, one has to wonder...

  6. But, IMO, nowhere near enough scoring. The East is too powerful to hope for low-scoring playoff wins.

    Playoff hockey is almost always a very low scoring affair. It's better the Sabres know how to handle that situation than the opposite.

     

    And I couldn't watch the game because that assbackwards league can't get it's games on Direct TV.

    The dispute is between Versus Network and DirectTV. How could the NHL influence that one way or another?

  7. I watch the Sabres casually. I used to be able to see the game in HD on MSG. Now it's always in standard definition. Is there no more HD in Rochester or is there another channel that I should try?

    Sabres home games are in HD in Rochester on MSGHD. Channel 1043 on Time Warner. The away games are generally not available in HD.

  8. I'm glad that the first three teams that have been eliminated were three of the less interesting pairs. It's going to be a good race!

    Only two teams were eliminated.

     

    I think I'm going to get really sick of the poker players. They are incredibly self-absored. I'm already sick of the Bahston couple. The only thing I liked about the poker players was when one them said she thought the Boston "lawyer" was too dumb to actually be a lawyer. I agree.

  9. I was a freshman at UB. On the bus from the Ellicot Complex to the Student Union for my first class of the day, I had heard that a plane had just struck one of the towers. Like everyone else, I pictured a little Cessna and didn't give it much thought. It wasn't until my buddy Mark burst into that English class late and out of breath from running in with the news that we all fully understood the severity. We let out of class very early and I was standing in a crowd in the Student Union with a bunch of class mates when the second plane hit. The TV reporter was talking with the second tower in the distant background and the impact was visible in the background. The reporter didn't seem to realize for a short time and kept talking. It was incredibly surreal.

     

    I remember the rest of the day being incredibly lonely. We huddled in the RA's dorm room watching the news together. Most of close group of friends were from Rochester and Buffalo but we had quite a few people in the hallway who from that area who were concerned about friends and family. I went home that weekend for the first time and it was an incredible relief to be with my family then.

     

    I was fortunate enough to have no friends or family involved that day. I didn't even know anyone who lived or worked in NYC so there wasn't even much worry. It didn't seem to occur to us to worry about who was on the planes. Still, occuring as it did only two weeks into my college career, that day had a profound impact on my college memories. I loved it at UB and have a ton of great memories but I doubt any of us will be able to separate those memories from the 9/11 ones.

  10. It's not up to the league to determine players market values and worth.

     

    The league needs to tread very carefully should they get involved in this after the Pats play their first game of the season. Surely the Pats would not be pleased if they were to have the trade rescinded meaning that they were disadvantaged in a game by not having a player as valuable as Seymour at their disposal.

    Interesting attempt at "logic" here.

     

    The league would not be denying the Patriots the use of Seymour during the first game. They traded him. They voluntarily gave up rights to him and should have no expectation of receiving services from him ever again. It does not matter if the trade gets voided by the league today, Tuesday, or in Week 16, the Patriots are not being "disadvantaged" by the league.

  11. I think you're correct about any fair-use ruling, Scott. Indeed, the guidelines I follow when I edit posts here come right out of the AP Stylebook section on media law. (Pages 368-9 in my 2004 edition, to be specific.)

     

    Mixed feelings on this. Looking at it from TBD's point of view -- although I'll note that this is merely my own opinion; only Scott can speak on behalf of the site -- a link and SHORT excerpt here actually provides value to The AP, because we're (hopefully) sending traffic to one of their affiliates. If they were to begin demanding money for every link, I might see that as reason to stop allowing any mention of their stories here, and that's not a solution I would contemplate with great joy.

     

    On the other hand, as a working sports writer who has seen some stories reprinted without my permission, nothing pisses me off more than seeing a blog cut/paste entire pieces without asking -- attributed or not. So if The AP wants to go after those offenders, more power to them.

    It's interesting that the article puts almost no emphasis on reprinting w/o permission, lack of proper credit, or plagiarism.

     

    It certainly makes it seem like the sole intent here is to squeeze revenue out of linking to articles. I can't see how a judge will rule in favor of this during the inevitable lawsuit, but even if it were, how is this a sound business decision? How will this result in anything more than a sudden drop in web traffic to AP news stories as they now will undoubtedly not show up in a Google search (and we all know how important that is). It's amazingly counter-intuitive.

  12. Glad to see I'm not the only one just noticing this. My sister-in-law is just out of college and addicted to this show and this season my wife ended up DVRing most episodes for her to come over and watch as my in-laws were having some TV/Cable issues that were slow to resolve.

     

    As you said, I am far from a prude, but I was surprised when the show not only implied that she slept with two of the three (and would've with the third if not for some "technical difficulties") but that it's pretty much expected and standard operating procedure.

     

    I'm trying not to make this political but it's hard not to laugh at people who use the "sanctity of marriage" argument when opposing gay marriage when show's like this have settled into our popular culture. It's a little surprising some conservative talking head hasn't tried to make an issue out of this.

  13. Trent Edwards arm strength has come into question over and over on this board so in an effort to put this to bed i'd like to show the facts...

     

    Top 5 Results: Ball Speed (Group 1)

    1. Troy Smith Ohio St. 58.5

    2. Jeff Rowe Nevada 57

    3. Drew Stanton Michigan St. 55.7

    4. Jared Zabransky Boise St. 55.2

    5. Paul Thompson Oklahoma 54.8

     

     

    Top 5 Results: Ball Speed (Group 2)

    1. Toby Korrodi Central Missouri St. 63

    2. John Beck Brigham Young 61.1

    3. Kevin Kolb Houston 55.3

    4. Trent Edwards Stanford 55.2

    5. James Pinkey East Carolina 53.9

    This isn't what I would call a convincing argument.

     

    There isn't an NFL starter (or even a good NFL back-up) on those lists. How many people were in each group? Six? What was the average speed? You need a better context for the data. The context right now says Edwards has a slightly stronger arm than some guy named Paul Thompson and slightly weaker arm than Drew Stanton. Great.

  14. The ref ruled that he made an intentional motion with his arm to direct the puck into the net. Using any part of your body to intentionally direct the puck into the net is not allowed. It's a judgement call on intent, but that's what he ruled. It would have counted if he had not moved his arm, and it hit him and went in.

    The puck went off his chest. The reverse angle clearly showed that.

  15. There isn't any doubt in my mind. I was just being nice.

     

    His hand was empty when he brought it forward. It looked that way to me the first time I saw it and apparently it looked that way to the booth.

     

    (that was the strangest spiral I've ever seen, course I do watch Bills QBs most of the time)

    How you can you watch that replay and say his hand was empty when it started forward? The ball is clearly in his hand through most of his throwing motion. Obviously, it's close enough to warrant a replay.

     

    I could not have cared less who won and I was astonished it wasn't reviewed. The worst part was Al Michaels turning into NFL corporate shill. What is this "the replay booth confirmed it was a fumble" crap? Really? The last 30 seconds of the Super Bowl is a good time to start making up new rules? Seriously?

  16. What makes that even worse, is Paille had one of the ten goals!

    Paille didn't score. In fact, I'm not sure Paille ever touched the puck.

     

    I believe the goals were scored by Stafford, Paetsch, Roy, Hecht, Connolly, Vanek, Spacek, Stafford, Stafford, and Connolly.

     

    Great games by our two top lines. Stafford, Connolly, and Vanek were amazing while Roy, Hecht, and Pominville were just slightly less amazing.

  17. I don't like those "rules of thumb."

     

    A person should look at their current expenditures and determine what they can spend on their own. Don't rely on a bank to tell you. That's partially how we got into this mess to begin with!

     

    For my wife and I, we pay nowhere near 28%. We bought our place 6 years ago making sure that, with proper budgeting, we'd be able to afford the house on just my salary in case we have kids at some point.

     

    Total agreement. My wife and I pay about 13% (that's net after income/property taxes/etc). That was by design because we plan on having my wife stay at home when we have kids. We already lead a pretty lean lifestyle and it's allowed us to build a very nice nest egg which is nice, in case one of us gets laid off.

×
×
  • Create New...