And here is some good news. http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2014/12/01/nhl-still-expects-healthy-rise-in-the-salary-cap/?utm_network=facebook&utm_post=3215995&utm_source=FB+-+NHL+on+NBC+Sports&utm_tags
I guess I don't understand why. Line blocking a little worse? Yeah. Jeffery with a step down? Yup. Marshall having a down year? Yup. But those can't account for the 2nd best offense in the league turning into somewhere in the late teens. Is it on Cutler? Trestmans play calling? Or a combo of a lot of things. It's rather perplexing. The league has figured out Trestman's offense and Trestman doesn't know how or have a counter move.
Calgary is 12-7-2 somehow. Their shooting percentage is very high, tell your friend to watch where the Flames end up in the standings. It will probably be 10th or worse. Also see Colorado last year to this year.
I don't know why it should. The team has regressed for quite a while. Maybe the McCaskey's will see the ridiculously long leash that Epstein got and knowing their cash flow isn't a problem they will feel comfortable with the status quo. But that is just further delaying the inevitable. I want an overhaul. Just curious, does your overhaul stop at Emery? If you're decided to can Emery the ax needs to cut a little deeper still. I would dump Phillips but do not think that is necessarily necessary for football improvement purposes. They should do with Phillips what the Cubs did with Crane Kenny. Add me to the camp that wants a full overhaul, its a lot quicker turnaround than in baseball. I just wish the Bears would have rebuilt the offense around 2009 when Cutler got here and the defense was still good.
I guess I got kinda lucky about the first year I followed my teams. 1984 Cubs 1984-85 Bulls Jordan's rookie year 1985 Bears 1985 or 86 Hawks they were very good but they got crushed by the super team Oilers. I was only able to watch the games when on the road of course at my grandma's because we didn't have Sportsvision. So I listened to the home games and a lot of the road games on some obscure radio station.
You want the definition of a fair weather fan, go look at the people who were cheering for the Cubs in 2003 and were then singing "Don't Stop Believing" in 2005.
That is so wrong. I am 37. I started going to games around 86 or 87. Probably went to two a year from then until 2003, when I got fed up with $Bill and his horseshit. I vowed never to buy a ticket again until he took his dirt nap. I bought my next ticket in December of 2007.
Who buys a $200+ ticket and then doesn't show? I know a couple of STH's that have had tickets for a long time and don't go to at least 1-2 games each year. I am not sure why. At the very least, sell them on Stubhub or give them away at face value at lower. I know STH's that have 4 tickets and they've given them to me at face value ($70). Plenty of people still want to go to Bears games regardless of the record because tickets are so hard to get. But I guess if you're rich. Lowest face value ticket this year is $81. I have four, I had to sell two last minute because my fair weather friend said he had to cancel because it's too cold and the Bears suck. At least he could have lied and said his kid was sick. I sold them on stub hub Saturday for $73. And the people who bought them ended up being pretty cool people.
Good game, Hawks carried the play. Got unlucky with the second Tampa goal. Got the 2 points anyway by winning rock, scissors, paper. 3-0 this year, unlike last year where they lost a majority of them.
Point spread is down to Bears -3.5 now. I still don't get that line. I figured it would be closer to a pickem. The public perception is the Bears are the worst football team of all time. It almost seems like Vegas wants people to bet the Vikings. Bears 31 Vikings 17 The road to 7-9 begins here.
So you really dislike Crawford's contract? I do. For two reasons. 1) I hate being tied to goaltenders for multiple years. These guys tend to ebb and flow, and outside the truly elite (are there any right now), they are replaceable. 2) I don't like the idea of paying that much to guys that aren't difference makers. The Blackhawks entire system is set-up so that overwhelming talent dominates the puck and they tend to only struggle when a goalie has an amazing game against them. I thought they did a real smart job of shifting from Niemi to Crawford and then should have continued shifting to new goalies while keeping the rest of the roster elite. They are dealing with cap issues and it does not help that a guy like Crawford is taking up $6m every year until 2020. Good points His contract seemed to be based on Jimmy Howard's they seem to be very similar. The only reason I think Stan did that was because they didn't have a goalie in the pipeline in 2013 like they did in 2010 when they switched from Niemi to Crawford. I was just saying assuming Crawford keeps up his similar numbers he has(average to slightly above average numbers) the 6 million wont be as much a percentage of the cap later on down the line.
It may seem like Crawford is overpaid now as this is year 1 of the deal, but in a couple years it wont seem so bad as other goalies will be up for new contracts. Just like Toews and Kane, those will seem like bargains midway thru their deals when guys like Stamkos gets their deals.