Bradley R. Weissenberger wrote:The Yankees of hockey. It's easy to outpass, outmuscle, "out-clutch" (whatever that means), etc. when you outspend virtually all of your competition.

Anyway, it's perfectly valid to hate a franchise based on its fandom as much as anything else. In fact, the attitiude and behavior of the fans is one of the few constants (along with the stadium and perhaps certain broadcasters) with any franchise.

Different franchises have cultivated far different types of fan bases. For instance, I'd gladly attend a game and sit next to the stereotypical Green Bay Packers, Oakland Raiders, Los Angeles Kings or St. Louis Cardinals fan. As far as sitting next to a New York Yankees, Chicago Cubs, Dallas Cowboys or Detroit Red Wings fan, or any Philadelphia fan, I'd rather eat my hand.

Bottom line: a professional sports franchise is an experience that goes beyond the players and coaches. It goes to the city itself, the fans, the venue, the vendors, etc. I can hate that franchise for any of those reasons.

Tim - I rest my case as to why I hold my sports playing opinions towards certain members writing in on the Wings. Nothing personal. (Or at least tell brad not to take it that way.)

It’s preposterous to compare, blame or point fingers and say that the athletes that “outspend” their competition are the reason for their individual and teams success. It all comes down to physical and mental ability. Does this mean if brad brings home a fat check that he's a better baseball player than someone else? Guess this simply makes me question how savvy an athlete someone truly is/or understands sports when they make these remarks.

Secondly, he just doesn’t like the Wings - I’m still at a loss for that whole reasoning, still no clarification in that department.

This exchange, between two individuals who have diametrically opposing but equally totally irrationally strong feelings regarding the worth of a specific professional sports franchise, puts me in mind of an argument I once saw two crackheads have about professional wrestling.

Bradley R. Weissenberger wrote:This is a very funny post! You are a funny and sensitive lady!

Wtf?

As for yourself... you are a sensitive gentleman.

btw - (Nashville is an awesome team with strong players. Close to that possible cup hoist you referred to.)

Angus Jung wrote:This exchange, between two individuals who have diametrically opposing but equally totally irrationally strong feelings regarding the worth of a specific professional sports franchise, puts me in mind of an argument I once saw two crackheads have about professional wrestling.

Angus Jung of RANK!!!

You would betray your brother of RANK? Sadness for my soul!

By the way, I loved the use of three consecutive adverbs, which puts me in the mind of an argument I once saw two crackheads have about writing in the English language...

Bradley R. Weissenberger wrote:So "pskooper" should be happy. "pskooper" cheers for an Original Six-er with massive resources in a league with serious financial disparities. Assuming that the looming NHL labor dispute does nothing to resolve these disparities, "pskooper" will be able to cheer for a winner for a long time, unlike the NHL fans in Florida, Nashville, Columbus, Minnesota, etc. and virtually every Canadian city, who are pretty well screwed in terms of ever having the chance to hoist the Cup.

If anyone has read this far, then I apologize for having stated the obvious.

Bradley, Bradley, Bradley...

What you state is not so obvious, but instead, it is incorrect. If you look at the link posted above by roit to the record of the Detroit Red Wings, you will see that they indeed did have a quite a long drought where they didn't win a cup. In fact, the drought lasted for 40 years! (1956 - 1996). I don't know the team salaries for each year, but since Detroit was a member of the original six teams, and Detroit has for a long time been 'Hockeytown', I'm going to assume that they had at least a substantial team salary during those 40 years. Yet they didn't win a cup.

They lost to Anahiem last year in the first round, they are losing to Calgary in the current series, and they have lost in the past. Their playoff record is almost .500.

It's ludicrous to think that how much you pay someone for a job, that they are going to do it better than someone who is paid less. Sure, you hope they are going to do a better job than the cheaper guy, or hell, maybe they've earned it from their past experience (which is the case with 100% of the players on the Red Wings I might add, and the same is true for, say, Colorado). But just because you wave that paycheck in front of their faces, doesn't guarantee that they are going to give you Michael Jordan or Wayne Gretzky-esque results. Look at this year's Yankees if you want to see what I'm talking about.

Pro athletes hire expensive lawyers/agents to negotiate their contracts in order to get them the most money they can for a certain time period, or to make sure that they are compensated fairly for their work. The player is only expected to show up and do the best job he can do just like anyone who has a job, be it a plumber or a brain surgeon.

I almost hate to use this comparison, but bear with me. I can point to one specific case where what you get doesn't depend on the money you spend for the work. For only $350 a day, you can hire one of the best recording engineers the world has ever known. Most engineers of lesser status charge multiples of this, have much greater demands, and are a pain in the dick to work with. You might argue that it's bad business sense, yet it proves my point. You can't expect results just because you pay an arm and a leg. Anyone who's ever bought anything knows this concept.

So, lay-off the Red Wings. They are a damn good hockey team whether your heart is behind them or not. They play just as hard as any other asshole out there on the frozen pond.

-russ

Russ,
WTF? I do not wish to get in the middle of this argument, but stating that there's no
correlation between how much you pay someone and their performance doesn't make
sense. In life, there are no guarantees. This is a true statement. Yet, in general, a
premium is paid for something that people feel is of better quality.

You've used the Yankees of '04 and the cost of a great recording engineer as valid
exceptions to a correlation between quality and cost. There are a number of other
exceptions, but in general there is a correlation between the quality of something and
it's price. Linux is another great exception to the rule as well (getting off the subject
of the Red Wings, but I have played sports).

Plumbers get paid a premium if they're good at their jobs. There are some that are
able to negotiate contracts that pay them more than they're probably worth, but if
you're efficient and good at sweating pipes then you'll probably be paid more.
As far as brain surgeons go, I don't know a ton of them that are pullin' down $8.75
an hour. They're paid a premium for the quality of their skills. By the way, if
you're melon gets dented for some reason. There really is no guarantee that
Dr. Brain is going to fix it. Talk about a crap shoot.

Like I said, I'm not really interested in getting into the argument, but I think your
ludicrous claim is somewhat ludicrous.
Best,
Brian

Of course, that's expected. That's what we're trained to believe. But time and time again, it is proven otherwise. Maybe it's time we start rethinking what we think we know. Stop taking things for granted. Get out of the rut.

I'm sure there's probably no brain surgeon in the land making $8.75 an hour, but how could you forget that a brain surgeon in NYC is probably making at least double that of a brain surgeon in Cheyenne, Wyoming. Does it mean that the brain surgeon in NYC is better than the one in WY? Not necessarily. Yet sports fans, and their detractors, LOVE and I mean I thinik they are literally IN LOVE with the lame-ass EXCUSE of, "Oh, they have umpteen dollars for their payroll, no wonder they win."

I had to step outside of the sports world to clarify the point. It doesn't mean that the same isn't true across the board.

With respect,
russ

There are these fans that are totally fucking insane. Say it's 2-0 Flames with 3 minutes to go in the 3rd, and it's Game 5, and the Red Wings are down 3 games to 1. The totally fucking insane fucking ass bitch whore cunt pussy welts still believe that their team will pull it out, just like they believe the team wins if they cheer loud enough and put their right socks on before their left ones. They also get really upset when people don't like their team.

The scoop on Poop is totally fucking insane.

("You guys shock and surprise me! Call me - so called 'one-note Charlie'… You both justify and give me good reason - to be given this name." This looks like it's in English, but it makes no sense at all. It's totally fucking insane.)

Here is the problem with Detroit: If they were a normal team, like the Flames or the Sens, they would not have three starting goaltenders. What the fuck. So it doesn't work out with Hasek. Big deal, maybe Legace can do it. Whoops, he can't do it all the time, let's throw in Joseph. He's not so bad.

That's three starting goalies on their payroll.

What the fuck.

pskooper wrote:He who vote crap - defend thy self ...

I'm so glad I didn't get involved in this, heh. This has turned into a really funny thread! Without wasting bytes and bytes of server space, it boils down to: 1) I'm an Avs fan. 2) I'm an Avs fan. 3) You had it coming. 4) If St. Louis and Nashville had won (i.e. Avs play Preds), I was gonna get to go to a game (or two!!). 5) I'd like to use the Bankees argument here, but the Avs aren't much better salary-wise, so I'd just be spouting a double standard. 6) There's probably a 6th reason, too... I just can't think of it.

CRAP.

Hosoi wrote:There are these fans that are totally fucking insane. Say it's 2-0 Flames with 3 minutes to go in the 3rd, and it's Game 5, and the Red Wings are down 3 games to 1. The totally fucking insane fucking ass bitch whore cunt pussy welts still believe that their team will pull it out, just like they believe the team wins if they cheer loud enough and put their right socks on before their left ones.

You must not have seen many hockey games. It's not that uncommon for a team to go on a streak and score two goals to tie the game, sending it to overtime where they win, or for them to go on a streak and score 3 goals in 3 minutes and win the game. Much less, the series. In fact, this happens all the time in sports, and playoff series. Just look at last year's Cubs Vs. Marlins if you want proof. Fucking Idiot.

Hosoi the wise wrote:They also get really upset when people don't like their team.

Uh.. Duh. Most sports fans will defend their team to the near death. Don't you assholes root for anything? Boring fucking way to live if you ask me.

Hosoi the fucking moron wrote:The scoop on Poop is totally fucking insane.

Look in the mirror dude, cuz you're the fucking retard.

hosoi the retard wrote:("You guys shock and surprise me! Call me - so called 'one-note Charlie'… You both justify and give me good reason - to be given this name." This looks like it's in English, but it makes no sense at all. It's totally fucking insane.)

What a pathetic little life you must lead if your only means of attacking someone is to pick on the way they write. If you haven't noticed, people take a lot of liberties when they are writing on an informal message board, and they often forget entire words or phrases which are vital to their statement. This means you sometimes have to read between the lines. Oh, but I forgot, you're the fucking realist who takes everything at face value. Wake up dude. No wonder you don't get laid.

There's more to life than what you apparantly think. Look at the big picture for once. Put down the grammer book, stop jerking off and get outside and play catch with a friend. Go ice skating. Go swimming. Get drunk and make an idiot of yourself. Get in a fight with your girlfriend over nothing. Laugh.

Getting mad at someone from Detroit, or Michigan, or Chicago for that matter (where practically ever other person moved here from MI), for liking the Red Wings is about the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. If you want to get mad at someone for liking Detroit, get mad at me. I was born in CO and should be an Avs fan. I can't stand those whiny bitches, and I think the Red Wings are where it's at.

And, I realized this the other night, if you want to get mad at a team, why don't you idiots GET MAD AT THE TEAMS THAT ARE SECOND BEST!!! Get mad at the teams that have a chance to make a run at being the best, but they don't do a damn thing about it. Typically, being second best is a helluva lot worse than being the worst. When you are the worst, you have all the excuses. When you are second best, you don't have an excuse.

But you idiot fucks wouldn't understand this because you're too busy sucking each other off.