But after a dismal loss to the undermanned Pittsburgh Penguins on Wednesday
night, those hopes are now all but dead.
As a result, the small-minded and the petty are rejoicing.
They see it as a wonderful development that the Rangers are out of the
picture. Somehow, using that fuzzy thought process that they employ to
compensate for their inability to apply logic, they determine that this is
good for hockey.
At least, that's what they say. There's a good chance that this is nothing
more than a rationalization to justify the most deeply entrenched emotion in
the Canadian psyche -- envy.
If you are truly a hockey fan, you have to put aside the petty prejudices.
What matters is that the huge and influential New York market has just taken
a major hit.
It is irrelevant that the Islanders and the New Jersey Devils will go into
the playoffs. They're not Manhattan teams. Whether we like it or not, in the
United States, the New York market, to usurp a quote from Reggie Jackson, is
the straw that stirs the drink.
Had the Rangers been able to make some sort of playoff run, they could have
dominated the fickle New York market -- and by doing so, given hockey a
boost it so badly needs.
Is it not reasonable to assume that if hockey's popularity grows, especially
in the U.S., the game will be better for it? And is it not reasonable to
assume that New York is the single most important locale to develop that
growth?
http://www.canoe.ca/TorontoSports/ts.ts-03-29-0126.html
EZoto
> On Sun, 30 Mar 2003 07:19:04 GMT, "Cindy" <cindy...@att.net> wrote:
>
>>The New York Rangers' playoff hopes have been slim for some time.
> is this the rag$ newsgroup?
> if I want news about the rag$ I'll go to their newsgroup
LOL...man, it's been a while since this dumb bastard has tried to play
newsgroup police. Let's see, the last time was with Katie Baker.
But, there's been plenty posted about the Rangers lately, Marc - most of
it less related to the Devils than what Cindy posted (maybe you're too
dense to see the connection). But you didn't take any of them on - afraid
of taking on someone who isn't a woman?
Pathetic.
> I wouldn't want to embarrass you,
Heh...yeah, of course you don't. Safer to embarrass the ladies.
PLUS, given all the crap Devils fans took from Ranger Fans since 1982,
it's only fair. This NG used to be littered with Ranger fans putting us
down and our team down. And this was after the Devils Won their 1st
Stanley Cup, and we still got crap from some Ranger fans. So if we want
to dicuss Rangers issues, what's the big deal?
And the article Cindy posted was about hockey in General, not JUST about
the Rangers. The author was trying to make a point about the overall
popularity of the game, and how the Rangers missing the playoffs could
bring that down. I don't necesarily agree with him there. Just like when
the Yankees played the Mets in the World Series, many folks across the
country were not as interested in the World Series as they would have
been had someone else been playing 1 of those teams. If the Rangers
aren't in the playoffs, how does that affect anyone outside of the NY
market?
JohnDoe wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Mar 2003 07:19:04 GMT, "Cindy" <cindy...@att.net> wrote:
>
>
>>The New York Rangers' playoff hopes have been slim for some time.
>
> is this the rag$ newsgroup?
> if I want news about the rag$ I'll go to their newsgroup
--
*****************************************************
"Looks like I picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue!"
http://www.justanotherwebsite.com
Al G.
Keith <ke...@spamsux.reversethelast2.com.justanotherwebsite> wrote in message news:<42Fha.17379$VM3.5...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>...
Bob
So there's a good reason why the Ranger$ shouldn't make the playoffs.
That and it would their golf handicaps...
-Dan
JohnDoe wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Mar 2003 07:19:04 GMT, "Cindy" <cindy...@att.net> wrote:
>
>> The New York Rangers' playoff hopes have been slim for some time.
> you're absolutely right....now run along.
ROFL!!!
How you been, Cindy?
"For the record, Lemaire has played Roloson in all four games against the
Red
Wings, their current first-round opponent. He went 2-2-0. For the record,
Lemaire played Fernandez in all four games against the Stars, another
potential first-round opponent. He went 3-1-0.
Anyone else see a pattern here? While Lemaire says he just throws his
goalies out there and lets them play on whatever date comes up, he has
juggled the schedule perfectly to give his netminders equal opportunities
against the contenders. If the Wild play the Red Wings, Roloson has to be
the goalie. If it's the Stars, count on Fernandez in net."
http://espn.go.com/nhl/columns/heika_mike/1530765.html
Be kind. The Viceroy did perform it as a single paragraph. The ol'
gameshape Viceroy could've followed it with 123 more. Unfortunately
this is the best the ol' shell-of-former-self Viceroy can splice
together these days.
> Doing good, Rog - still hanging out in Nevada....waiting for the snow to
> quit in Montana <g> How's the little drummer boy?
Heh...doing OK! Hanging out in Jersey, biding my time...;-)
> Read something
> interesting about the Baby Devils the other day - Lemaire is a sly fox with
> his goalie rotation....
>
> "For the record, Lemaire has played Roloson in all four games against the
> Red
> Wings, their current first-round opponent. He went 2-2-0. For the record,
> Lemaire played Fernandez in all four games against the Stars, another
> potential first-round opponent. He went 3-1-0.
>
> Anyone else see a pattern here?
You mean like when he was in Jersey, and played Brodeur and Terreri in the
same amount of games, but gave Brodeur the important ones? Nah, not at
all! ;-)
when did it become the medias job to promote NHL teams?