Here-
Do I need to say more?
If you honestly believe the guy doesn't crumble under pressure then I'll sell you a whole new bushel of excuses for next spring

Moderator: Referees
Ummm.....what's your point? That Chicago is a team that can score lots of goals? That they have been one of the best teams in the league for the last 6 seasons? That they love their Chelsea Dagger?Uncle dans leg wrote:OK Meds....
Here-
Do I need to say more?
If you honestly believe the guy doesn't crumble under pressure then I'll sell you a whole new bushel of excuses for next spring
1. Irritated or not, Luongo is as professional as it gets = zero effect.Mondi wrote: As a man who deals exclusively in common sense, how sensible is it for the Canucks to get one more year out of an already irritated and declining 34-year-old Luongo only to buy him out after a "lame duck" season?
1. Revenue. Luongo sells reg season tickets = $$. Winning more games = $$. Making the playoffs = $$.Mondi wrote: Furthermore, how is it sensible for Florida to then take on a soon to be 35-year-old puck stopper to work with a young nucleus destined for...an 8th places finish, at best?
Agreed.Mondi wrote: It's not that I doubt the great SL's reasons, it is that I do not understand them. As I am quite simple minded you see.
Okay, I LOLed.Southern_Canuck wrote:Luongo was already dead and buried - so now I guess it's the Zombie Graveyard...!Strangelove wrote:Yet look how he gets treated by many here at the Goalie Graveyard.![]()
Yours truly asked the question at Central in 2006:
"Will Roberto Luongo break the curse of Vancouver's Goalie Graveyard?"
Perhaps he yet will amirite Dave?
I'M BACK!
He's past his physical prime and just had his worst statistical season ever... all after being supplanted by a kid with half a season of NHL hockey under his belt.Strangelove wrote: 2. Luongo is not in decline = see my posts above.
Rumsfeld wrote:Yeah, what a disaster that 2011 Canucks team was that somehow had one of the best statistical regular seasons in NHL history.
Fuck off Rummy. You know as well as anyone that when that team melted down, they really melted down. Yeah they were good, damned good, but compared to teams that have actually won the Cup they didn't have the mental fortitude to buckle down and tighten things up if Lou let in a soft goal. Few are the times that they would actually rally and he would shit the bed all by himself.Rumsfeld wrote:Yeah, what a disaster that 2011 Canucks team was that somehow had one of the best statistical regular seasons in NHL history.
Then you're just gonna hafta trust the Great Strangelove!Rumsfeld wrote: If he can put together a great regular season AND playoffs I'll be back on his wagon faster than coco's fist can penetrate a potato.
I just have very serious doubts in his ability to do that.*
Well here's hoping he's still working on fixing dat dere.Rumsfeld wrote: for some unfathomable reason he seems to think we can throw this pillow-soft core back in the mix and get a different result.
I haven't tried that one yet.....just passed the grade 8 last month, due to write the grade nine at the end of August. Gotta study for that one ya know.Rumsfeld wrote:If he can put together a great regular season AND playoffs I'll be back on his wagon faster than coco's fist can penetrate a potato.
I just have very serious doubts in his ability to do that.*
*not the coco part
A trip to the final four would IMO be a total overachievement for this team in '14. Kind of like Meds passing a grade nine equivalency exam tomorrow.![]()
Burrrows and Bieksa are the pieces Gillis should have been looking to move pre-FAfrenzy, but for some unfathomable reason he seems to think we can throw this pillow-soft core back in the mix and get a different result.
Oh right because of Torts, lol.
You are a lunatic.Mondi wrote:As a man who deals exclusively in common sense
Referring to Strangelove as great proves it.Mondi wrote:the great SL's