Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
Reef, you may not be able to define cliche, but you can certainly give a nice example of it. The whole thing about this is he didn't need to stand up for himself. He knew he could handle a few shots from the wee moron. He was trying to do what he had to to win. YOU needed him to stand up for himself. YOU were embarrassed. Did someone harass you for being a Canucks fan at the water-cooler the next day? If some generally-accepted tough guy took a bunch of shots, you'd all be leaping around saying how incredibly tough that is. Instead, for Danny, it's just more self-propagating opinion. Most media editorial material is built on the premise of somewhat arbitrarily taking a position then using all means necessary to support said position, whether it's correct or not and whether it's current or not. You could argue that the Sedins were labelled soft in their first six months in the league and no one has bothered to revise that initial gut-reaction label in the subsequent decade.
Incidentally, I would have 'gone apeshit' in that situation, but I don't have anywhere near the self-control and self-confidence that Dank has.
Mëds, you may be right regarding the eroding inspiration, but you can also be a kid on the bench thinking while you're having trouble against an aggressive team that if the twins can continue to battle while being pounded you can. I suspect it's a mixture of opinion on a player by player basis. Continuing with the image/stereotype idea, recall in the 2013 playoffs that Daniel threw an open-ice hit on Wingels and got a penalty for it. In OT.
Puck wrote:Reef, you may not be able to define cliche, but you can certainly give a nice example of it. The whole thing about this is he didn't need to stand up for himself. He knew he could handle a few shots from the wee moron. He was trying to do what he had to to win. YOU needed him to stand up for himself. YOU were embarrassed. Did someone harass you for being a Canucks fan at the water-cooler the next day? If some generally-accepted tough guy took a bunch of shots, you'd all be leaping around saying how incredibly tough that is. Instead, for Danny, it's just more self-propagating opinion. Most media editorial material is built on the premise of somewhat arbitrarily taking a position then using all means necessary to support said position, whether it's correct or not and whether it's current or not. You could argue that the Sedins were labelled soft in their first six months in the league and no one has bothered to revise that initial gut-reaction label in the subsequent decade.
Incidentally, I would have 'gone apeshit' in that situation, but I don't have anywhere near the self-control and self-confidence that Dank has.
Mëds, you may be right regarding the eroding inspiration, but you can also be a kid on the bench thinking while you're having trouble against an aggressive team that if the twins can continue to battle while being pounded you can. I suspect it's a mixture of opinion on a player by player basis. Continuing with the image/stereotype idea, recall in the 2013 playoffs that Daniel threw an open-ice hit on Wingels and got a penalty for it. In OT.
Puck wrote:Reef, you may not be able to define cliche, but you can certainly give a nice example of it. The whole thing about this is he didn't need to stand up for himself. He knew he could handle a few shots from the wee moron. He was trying to do what he had to to win. YOU needed him to stand up for himself. YOU were embarrassed. Did someone harass you for being a Canucks fan at the water-cooler the next day? If some generally-accepted tough guy took a bunch of shots, you'd all be leaping around saying how incredibly tough that is. Instead, for Danny, it's just more self-propagating opinion. Most media editorial material is built on the premise of somewhat arbitrarily taking a position then using all means necessary to support said position, whether it's correct or not and whether it's current or not. You could argue that the Sedins were labelled soft in their first six months in the league and no one has bothered to revise that initial gut-reaction label in the subsequent decade.
Incidentally, I would have 'gone apeshit' in that situation, but I don't have anywhere near the self-control and self-confidence that Dank has.
Mëds, you may be right regarding the eroding inspiration, but you can also be a kid on the bench thinking while you're having trouble against an aggressive team that if the twins can continue to battle while being pounded you can. I suspect it's a mixture of opinion on a player by player basis. Continuing with the image/stereotype idea, recall in the 2013 playoffs that Daniel threw an open-ice hit on Wingels and got a penalty for it. In OT.
Might have something to do with the constant derailment of threads during what is the busiest weeks of the off season. Save the regurgitated crap for August and contribute to the thread ffs.
BladesofSteel wrote:Might have something to do with the constant derailment of threads during what is the busiest weeks of the off season. Save the regurgitated crap for August and contribute to the thread ffs.
But but...Benning only drafted Virtanen cuz Gillis hadn't cleaned out his desk yet...
Puck wrote:Incidentally, I would have 'gone apeshit' in that situation, but I don't have anywhere near the self-control and self-confidence that Dank has.
He'd searching for gender neutral washroom if I was involved.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.
I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
Puck wrote:Incidentally, I would have 'gone apeshit' in that situation, but I don't have anywhere near the self-control and self-confidence that Dank has.
Ze'd be searching for gender neutral washroom if I was involved.
BladesofSteel wrote:Might have something to do with the constant derailment of threads during what is the busiest weeks of the off season. Save the regurgitated crap for August and contribute to the thread ffs.
But but...Benning only drafted Virtanen cuz Gillis hadn't cleaned out his desk yet...
110%
Benning didn't get a chance to strut his Genius'ness until the 2nd round. Gillman and the Gillis posse wanted nothing to do with the 2nd round and beyond
“Tyler Myers is my guy... I was taking to Scotty Bowman last night and he was bringing up his name, and saying he’s a big guy and big guy need big minutes to play, he is playing great for ya… and I agree with him… He’s been exceptional” - Bruce Boudreau
BladesofSteel wrote:Might have something to do with the constant derailment of threads during what is the busiest weeks of the off season. Save the regurgitated crap for August and contribute to the thread ffs.
But but...Benning only drafted Virtanen cuz Gillis hadn't cleaned out his desk yet...
110%
Benning didn't get a chance to strut his Genius'ness until the 2nd round. Gillman and the Gillis posse wanted nothing to do with the 2nd round and beyond
What a load of shit.
“I don’t care what you and some other poster were talking about”
BladesofSteel wrote:Might have something to do with the constant derailment of threads during what is the busiest weeks of the off season. Save the regurgitated crap for August and contribute to the thread ffs.
But but...Benning only drafted Virtanen cuz Gillis hadn't cleaned out his desk yet...
110%
Benning didn't get a chance to strut his Genius'ness until the 2nd round. Gillman and the Gillis posse wanted nothing to do with the 2nd round and beyond
The whole thing about this is he didn't need to stand up for himself. He knew he could handle a few shots from the wee moron. He was trying to do what he had to to win. YOU needed him to stand up for himself. YOU were embarrassed. Did someone harass you for being a Canucks fan at the water-cooler the next day? If some generally-accepted tough guy took a bunch of shots, you'd all be leaping around saying how incredibly tough that is. Instead, for Danny, it's just more self-propagating opinion. Most media editorial material is built on the premise of somewhat arbitrarily taking a position then using all means necessary to support said position, whether it's correct or not and whether it's current or not. You could argue that the Sedins were labelled soft in their first six months in the league and no one has bothered to revise that initial gut-reaction label in the subsequent decade.
