Embarrassed to be a Flyer fan

[ruxpin]

I wasn't too keen on Emery's fight.

It was not necessary , if he wanted to mix it up there are better ways , as aziz described.

 

to me though Schenn VLC and Simmonds isn't the "goon" line.   Simmonds and Schenn will fight but that's not their game.  Who did Washington have out for the line brawl ? Volpatti, Wilson and Urnbaum or some ****.  Volpatti had already tuned up Downie right ?  who's putting the goon squad on the ice ? Olesky ? at the NHL he's a "gritty, agitator type"  .  Plenty of blame can be assigned here.  If you're the caps why not let Simmonds run around for 10 more feet and pick up a charging penalty? why grab him and guarantee the outcome ? 

 

people like to act as though there is no culpability for the caps in the line brawl and i'll posit that they started it by grabbing Simmonds after he hit a guy in the flow of the game, while competing for the puck. 

 

sure, Emery took things too far and should not have skated 200ft to engage Holtby,  but to act like the Flyers are a team of butchers and that was our set of goons on the ice to send a message, is some heinous atrocity against our glorious sport, and we're outraged  is bullshit.

 

Good post.  

 

the only reason I don't get on the Caps a little more is that it wasn't like there was only 3-4 minutes left.   At 15 minutes to go, you're still rolling your lines (if you're not Philadelphia and actually HAVE a fourth line) and Volpatti and Wilson usually line together.  I think Latta was the third--at least I *think* that's who came and pretended to want to intervene on Holtby's behalf).  I don't have a problem with the Caps putting their 4th line out after a goal.

 

But here's the problem I have with the Caps.   Why did not one of them come to Holtby's aid?  I mean Latta comes down there and says "hey, stop it" but that's about it.   I've seen people say "the ref wouldn't let him."   What???  I didn't see the ref physically restrain him.   He may have said "don't" just like he said to Emery "don't" but that's about it.   Someone has to get there to help their goalie, and not one did.   If I'm Holtby, I'm not too happy with my teammates there.

[EightyEight]

@ruxpin

Edited November 4, 2013 by ruxpin
Trolling. Do you see how this is going to work?

[radoran]

Good post.

the only reason I don't get on the Caps a little more is that it wasn't like there was only 3-4 minutes left. At 15 minutes to go, you're still rolling your lines (if you're not Philadelphia and actually HAVE a fourth line) and Volpatti and Wilson usually line together. I think Latta was the third--at least I *think* that's who came and pretended to want to intervene on Holtby's behalf). I don't have a problem with the Caps putting their 4th line out after a goal.

But here's the problem I have with the Caps. Why did not one of them come to Holtby's aid? I mean Latta comes down there and says "hey, stop it" but that's about it. I've seen people say "the ref wouldn't let him." What??? I didn't see the ref physically restrain him. He may have said "don't" just like he said to Emery "don't" but that's about it. Someone has to get there to help their goalie, and not one did. If I'm Holtby, I'm not too happy with my teammates there.

I'm gonna say that Holtby is happier none of his teammates got suspended while "defending" him.

And he got the best revenge - he got back in his crease and finished his shutout.

At this point, it looks more like Emery was finding a way to get out of a game he was playing like crap in.

[fanaticV3.0]

The Broad Street Bullies haven't existed - much less that "style" of hockey - in 30 years.

 

Part of this organization's problem is that they haven't paid attention to the past 30 years. The game has changed. Players have changed.

 

Even with that said, when did Bernie skate down the ice and jump the unwilling opposing goalie?

 

Hockey Fights has Bernie listed for three (3) career fights: http://www.hockeyfights.com/players/11326. The last one was in 1971.

 

A defenseman, a left wing and, yes, a goalie.

The goalie was in January, 1968. I missed it because it was five months before I was born.

 

If the reverse had happened - if a crazed Holtby came down and jumped an unwilling Mason, beating him repeatedly - the "Flyer fan" reaction would be much different than it is.

 

It doesn't matter when it happened. Physical play has been this team's branding for years. They call it "Flyers hockey" in their little marketing pieces. I don't condone what he did. I didn't want him on the team the first time and I didn't this time either, but I've seen much worse from people who have worn the O&B and not only was there no outrage in the past, the actions were cheered.

 

I don't really see a lot of people defending Emery's actions. Are a lot of people defending his actions? From what I've seen, most people are not happy with him.

[EightyEight]

I'm going to answer your other question to me here as well rather than two posts.

 

 RUXPIN is at it again.  Like he says, He's got the correct answer to all the flyers troubles.

[Green Man]

Well they responded with a solid win on Saturday, so I guess Friday night wasn't that bad huh?

 

I think many fans in here need better patience, the knee-jerking and OUTRAGE ******* bores to no end.  This is a long season, esp with the olympics and things are going to change league-wide between now and April bigtime.

 

I don't think this team is as bad as they've played, and to call the 3rd period of Friday's game one of the most embarrassing moments is just bad hyperbole at best.  I ddn't like what Emery did, but this is how things go in the NHL sometimes. 

[fanaticV3.0]

I'm going to answer your other question to me here as well rather than two posts.

 

First, "It's the utter nonsense they pulled in the third."  Fair question.   I didn't have a real problem with Simmonds.  I would have been better with it had it been earlier the game when a fight might have served a purpose to ignite the team.  By 7-0, it just had a feel of, "**** it, we're losing and I can't do anything about that, so let's fight."   At the point in which the whole line brawl happened, even without the Emery thing, I was so utterly disgusted with the team.  They didn't show up at all and suddenly want to fight because they're so utterly inept and worthless at hockey that that's all they got.   It reminded me of the dumb thug who can't handle any decent argument because he lacks the 3rd brain cell, so out of frustration of being made to look like an idiot he just starts swinging--in the middle of a stage during an actual DEBATE--where the point is to actually make decent arguments.

 

So, I mean the nonsense in its totality.   But I could have been fine with the Simmonds thing.  I could even have been fine with Schenn and VL fighting.   The Emery thing just made the whole thing a circus act, for me.

 

To your point above, primarily the bold part.   It was Hospodar and Chico on the ice for that pre-game thing against Montreal.   I actually didn't like that, either.   At least in that particular case, it was all between willing combatants.   I just thought the whole premise to it (the shooting down the ice into the net after the pre-game skate) was so utterly stupid.  It made hockey look like WWF, and I have no time for pro wrestling.   If I wanted to watch a bunch of brainless imbeciles, I'd either watch WWF or C-SPAN.   I'd rather watch hockey.

 

Don't get me wrong.  I like fighting in hockey.   I like when the game causes tensions between the two teams to boil and you have a fight as a result.   I'm all for a good line brawl, too.  I grew up watching the Bullies and loved the bench-clearing stuff.   The Flyers going into the stands in Toronto was a bit much in retrospect, but at the time I was probably only roughly 10 years old and "embarrassing" didn't occur to me.

 

This, to me, was just a bunch of stupid players realizing they were completely inept at what they were supposed to be doing having a temper tantrum on national television.

 

Lastly, the whole thing stinks to me because apparently Holmgren--the GM--went into the dressing room between the 2nd and 3rd period to "address" the team.  First of all, I don't really support the idea that a GM needs to go into a dressing room during intermission to address his team at all.   What the hell is the head coach there for?   I mean, the guy was what, 8 games in at the time?  You really need the GM to go and support (or undermine?) the coach in INTERMISSION only 8 games in?  If that's the case, why the hell did you hire him?   Take it yourself, Holmgren!

 

But in this case, the GM goes into the locker room between periods and not 5 minutes into the next period you have the team explode into hockey tourettes and a goalie skate down the length of the ice to assault the opposing goalie.   At the very least, the whole thing looks contrived rather than the culmination of tensions on the part of both teams.   At the worst, the dumbassery looks premeditated and ordered by the GM (supported by the fact that not one player, coach, nor GM has commented on the Holmgren "address").

 

Now, I don't know that it was ordered (although I'm kind of sticking with that accusation).  So we'll go with simply being contrived.   Again, if I wanted contrived or scripted, I'd watch WWF (or WWE or whatever the hell they call it now). 

 

For me, the whole thing was utter nonsense.

 

I don't have a problem with Schenn, Simmonds, or VLC's fights either. I would also agree Emery's actions are more "WWF" than theirs. No disagreement on either point. I just don't really get why people are so mad with Emery when back in the 70s or 80s people would have loved this kind of stuff (though I hear you personally like liking the Hospodar thing).

Edited November 4, 2013 by fanaticV3.0

[radoran]

It doesn't matter when it happened. Physical play has been this team's branding for years. They call it "Flyers hockey" in their little marketing pieces. I don't condone what he did. I didn't want him on the team the first time and I didn't this time either, but I've seen much worse from people who have worn the O&B and not only was there no outrage in the past, the actions were cheered.

I don't really see a lot of people defending Emery's actions. Are a lot of people defending his actions? From what I've seen, most people are not happy with him.

The context here is people on this board doing exactly thst - defending his actions, yes.

[EightyEight]

@ruxpin

 

  seems to me like your are a bully.

[aziz]

I just don't really get why people are so mad with Emery when back in the 70s or 80s people would have loved this kind of stuff (though I hear you personally like liking the Hospodar thing).

 

there wasn't a lot of jumping guys who obviously didn't want to fight going on, though.  that's the thing that rubbed people the wrong way, there was no context or reason other than emery wanted to fight the opposing goalie, whoever he was.  70's and 80's (and since) it was with willing opponents and generally for in-game reason.  emery had as much reason to pissed at the capital's trainer as he did holtby.

[fanaticV3.0]

The context here is people on this board doing exactly thst - defending his actions, yes.

 

A few year, but the majority?

[aziz]

  seems to me like your are a bully.

 

i'm not entirely sure you are going to make it to 25 posts at this rate.

 

here, let me help.  check this site out, you may like it:  http://forums.philly.com/discussions/Flyers_Forum/kr-flyers?nav=messages

[ruxpin]

I just don't really get why people are so mad with Emery when back in the 70s or 80s people would have loved this kind of stuff (though I hear you personally like liking the Hospodar thing).

 

Yeah, i think maybe it just comes down to viewing the whole thing in context of already being thoroughly disgusted with the whole team.  At least for me, anyway (not trying to speak for anyone else).  Maybe in different context I would have viewed it with the same applause as the 70s or 80s people.

[radoran]

A few year, but the majority?

Nope. MOST thought it was terrible.

[EightyEight]

@ruxpin.   Not everyone agrees with me so I'm taking my puck and going home.  Typical.

[Polaris922]

It doesn't matter when it happened. Physical play has been this team's branding for years. They call it "Flyers hockey" in their little marketing pieces. I don't condone what he did. I didn't want him on the team the first time and I didn't this time either, but I've seen much worse from people who have worn the O&B and not only was there no outrage in the past, the actions were cheered.

I don't really see a lot of people defending Emery's actions. Are a lot of people defending his actions? From what I've seen, most people are not happy with him.

You don't see a lot of people defending his actions HERE. But most here aren't your average Flyers fans. They're HOCKEY fans first. That's the difference. I think the average Flyers fan's thoughts on the subject were clearly demonstrated when a guy gets third star with a .733 save percentage after assaulting another player in a 7-0 loss.

Do you think any other team would even consider a losing player a star in a 7-0 loss??

As for @mojo1917 saying the Caps are to partly to blame... That's crap bud. Coaches often follow up goals in lopsided games with third or fourth liners to protect their stars. Simmons proved why. He was running around hitting everyone not even trying for puck possession, and if they hadn't grabbed him they risk him hurting someone. I think the Caps did it exactly right. And trust me, my team's rivalry with them is as bad as it is with your Flyers.

[ruxpin]

Well they responded with a solid win on Saturday, so I guess Friday night wasn't that bad huh?

 

I think many fans in here need better patience, the knee-jerking and OUTRAGE ****** bores to no end.  This is a long season, esp with the olympics and things are going to change league-wide between now and April bigtime.

 

I don't think this team is as bad as they've played, and to call the 3rd period of Friday's game one of the most embarrassing moments is just bad hyperbole at best.  I ddn't like what Emery did, but this is how things go in the NHL sometimes. 

 

Since I'm the one who said it, I guess it would be weird to actually agree, but you're probably right.

 

Not sure what to think about Saturday, though.   I mean, I guess you have to play who you're scheduled, but it WAS the Devils.   A shutout is a shutout, but I'm not sure how much the Flyers played a great game and how much they were simply playing the Devils.  They only scored one, so it's not like they came out REALLY good from "fire'em up" thing that the 3rd was supposed to be.

[EightyEight]

i'm not entirely sure you are going to make it to 25 posts at this rate.

 

here, let me help.  check this site out, you may like it:  http://forums.philly.com/discussions/Flyers_Forum/kr-flyers?nav=messages

 

Why?  Because you don't agree with me?

[Polaris922]

seems to me like your are a bully.

Actually I'm the bully. Leave it be.

[hf101]

Let's get this thread back on topic.

[flyerrod]

That's crap bud. Coaches often follow up goals in lopsided games with third or fourth liners to protect their stars.

 

Kessel against Scott?.....I don't agree with what Emery did. He should have taken on one of the guys who was chirping and disturbing him, not a hapless/defenseless goalie like Holtby. It could have been that none of them wanted to go with Emery............

[fanaticV3.0]

there wasn't a lot of jumping guys who obviously didn't want to fight going on, though.  that's the thing that rubbed people the wrong way, there was no context or reason other than emery wanted to fight the opposing goalie, whoever he was.  70's and 80's (and since) it was with willing opponents and generally for in-game reason.  emery had as much reason to pissed at the capital's trainer as he did holtby.

 

Make no mistake, I don't like the jumping either, but if I'm being honest the 70s and 80s were way dirtier than the game now. Not even debatable to me. And if you think it was all a bunch of fights between guys who had gentlemen's agreements to fight nice, I think your a little naïve.

[aziz]

Make no mistake, I don't like the jumping either, but if I'm being honest the 70s and 80s were way dirtier than the game now. Not even debatable to me. And if you think it was all a bunch of fights between guys who had gentlemen's agreements to fight nice, I think your a little naïve.

 

oh, agree totally.  there was no code at all back then.  hair pulling, eye gouging, beating on unconcious players, it was really and actually barbaric.  but.  there still wasn't a ton of guys going after other players who weren't involved to that point.  bernie parent played several years with the flyers, wasn't a billy smith/ron hextall kind of goalie getting in the middle of scrums, and not once did someone grab him and start beating on him.  most everything that happened was in-game and two (or more) guys pushing and shoving and escalating and finally boiling over and punching.  it wasn't gentlemen's agreements (those are new, too, along with "the code"), it came from actual anger, from the play on the ice turning into the fighting on the ice.  emery and holtby was none of that.

[fanaticV3.0]

You don't see a lot of people defending his actions HERE. But most here aren't your average Flyers fans. They're HOCKEY fans first. That's the difference. I think the average Flyers fan's thoughts on the subject were clearly demonstrated when a guy gets third star with a .733 save percentage after assaulting another player in a 7-0 loss.

Do you think any other team would even consider a losing player a star in a 7-0 loss??

As for @mojo1917 saying the Caps are to partly to blame... That's crap bud. Coaches often follow up goals in lopsided games with third or fourth liners to protect their stars. Simmons proved why. He was running around hitting everyone not even trying for puck possession, and if they hadn't grabbed him they risk him hurting someone. I think the Caps did it exactly right. And trust me, my team's rivalry with them is as bad as it is with your Flyers.

 

The media votes on the three stars of the game. That has nothing to do with fans opinions.

 

Truthfully, between here, Facebook, and the radio, I haven't heard much support for Emery.

[mojo1917]

That's crap bud. Coaches often follow up goals in lopsided games with third or fourth liners to protect their stars. Simmons proved why. He was running around hitting everyone not even trying for puck possession, and if they hadn't grabbed him they risk him hurting someone. I think the Caps did it exactly right. And trust me, my team's rivalry with them is as bad as it is with your Flyers.

 

 

me and the dead owl don't give a hoot about the Caps. There is no rivalry with the Caps.  

the referee was going to call either interference or charging within 5 seconds of Simmonds hitting Wilson. 

the point is; the line of Simmonds VLC and Schenn wasn't sent out there to "send a message".   if Oates wanted to keep things strictly hockey he wouldn't have sent Volpatti's line out.

we'll just disagree here.