Adamflyers Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 There were times that Rinaldo was effective in his role and not a complete waste of a roster spot! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 There were times that Rinaldo was effective in his role and not a complete waste of a roster spot!Most of those times involved popcorn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adamflyers Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 I do not think Lauren Hart is a very good anthemist.Oh AJ....If you have ever attended a game, you would know she is the "Number 1 ranked anthemist in the NHL", so....yeah...in your face! She has held this esteemed title every year since we had Forsberg. These rankings don't lie my friend! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 Oh AJ....If you have ever attended a game, you would know she is the "Number 1 ranked anthemist in the NHL", so....yeah...in your face! She has held this esteemed title every year since we had Forsberg. These rankings don't lie my friend!The only one I found was Bleacher Report from 20111. They had her at #5.I suppose it depends upon what one is measuring. Getting the crowed amped up? She has to be up there. Objectively just in vocals, really not what she used to be. The "rankings" based on polling do little for me. I'm okay with her as long as they don't have that God awful video going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LegionOfDoom Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 A healthy Umby will pot 20-25 goals this year under Haksty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 A healthy Umby will pot 20-25 goals this year under Haksty.LOL. The question was "unpopular," not "comical." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 ...Colorado" ends in "duh," too.It does?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 It does?? LOL probably not for "normal" people. Around these parts, yeah. And "Missourah" (I don't personally say this one). Keep in mind, around here they call green bell peppers "mangoes." You can't make this up. And "Warshington" (not a deliberate attempt at working in "war," which would be mildly entertaining. I've been up here for twenty years and will never understand the mango thing and still have no idea what they would call an actual mango. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 Keep in mind, around here they call green bell peppers "mangoes." You're serious aren't you? Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 You're serious aren't you? Really? I wish I weren't and yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyerfan2 Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 The Flyers have no identity any more , their not a hard hitting team, their not a tough team, their not a speedy team, their not an overly skilled team, hell they can not even be accused of being a hard working team on a lot of nights.So what is the identity of the Flyers.?I'd love to see them build in the direction of the glory day 70's , with the right balance of skill and team toughness it could work again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 I wish I weren't and yes. Those folks gotta get out more. On a completely separate matter, I note the spelling of the plural mangoes not mangos. I guess I knew that, but had to check. Huh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 Those folks gotta get out more. On a completely separate matter, I note the spelling of the plural mangoes not mangos. I guess I knew that, but had to check. Huh. LOL. I paused when typing it myself and had to look it up. It looks wrong. (Apparently both are correct after looking again. It shall henceforth be mangos. Although "Peppers" is easier to pluralize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poconono Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 They will not be able to rid themselves of Vinnie's, Umbie's, Streit's and Mac's contracts until they run their full course. Until then the Flyers will remain a middle of the pack team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 and still have no idea what they would call an actual mango A rainbow pepper? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 A rainbow pepper?I like "c'est n'est pas une mango" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poulin20 Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 OK here goes... The 1997 and 2010 finals teams were good but not great. Both got hot at the right time and then lost to the superior team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poulin20 Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 The only one I found was Bleacher Report from 20111. They had her at #5.I suppose it depends upon what one is measuring. Getting the crowed amped up? She has to be up there.Objectively just in vocals, really not what she used to be.The "rankings" based on polling do little for me.I'm okay with her as long as they don't have that God awful video going. LOL he is definitely saying it sarcastically as I sit next to him at the games and we routinely make fun of the announcement that Lou Nolan makes about her being the #1 ranked anthemist. We say it is akin to the #1 Dad shirt in Seinfeld. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarsippius Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 OK here goes...The 1997 and 2010 finals teams were good but not great. Both got hot at the right time and then lost to the superior team. I notice you left out 1987, wise choice lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poulin20 Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 I notice you left out 1987, wise choice lol Yeah I think you and I have a pretty strong bias to that team. While they also got beaten by the better team (probably the best team ever) the one thing that stands out to me about them vs the 1997 and 2010 teams is that they were a more complete team who deserved to be there and didn't just happen to slide in at the right time. If Tim Kerr were there then who knows??? Sky was the limit and we probably would have won and not even be having this conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ8812 Posted August 11, 2015 Author Share Posted August 11, 2015 OK here goes... The 1997 and 2010 finals teams were good but not great. Both got hot at the right time and then lost to the superior team. That's really common, and pretty much happens to every SC winner and finalist. But I disagree about 2010. That team was one of the best Flyers teams we've had in a long time, aside from our goalie. We had the right mix of players and clicked. We had Young guys stepping up their play in the post season (Giroux, Leino), we had players playing great in their primes (Richards, Hartnell, Carle, Gagne, Coburn), and we had older players that were playing like their were younger (Briere, Pronger, Timonen). We had 4 lines of forwards and our top-2 defense pairs that knew their roles, and played their asses off for a smart coach. The only shortcomings for that team was a mediocre 3rd pair on the blueline and **** between pipes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyClarkeFan16 Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 My unpopular belief is that RJ Umberger can still score 20+ goals a season. Last season was a write off because of hip and abdomen injuries, but the season before, he still scored 20 playing third line minutes and a very heavy checking role. If he's healthy this year, I can see a 20 goal - 40 point season out of RJ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter puck Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 I don't know about that. Sometimes when some Americans (and Canadians probably) sing the "Can-aaa-DA" they pronounce the last part "DUH!" It's hard enough being Canadian living next door to you a-holes, we don't need to be called dense.Personally, I'm a huge fan of God Bless America, which I came to know only because I was a Flyer fan. I love it.What i like best is a gentleman telling me how great canada is while hes living in florida for eight months a year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 That's really common, and pretty much happens to every SC winner and finalist. But I disagree about 2010. That team was one of the best Flyers teams we've had in a long time, aside from our goalie. We had the right mix of players and clicked. We had Young guys stepping up their play in the post season (Giroux, Leino), we had players playing great in their primes (Richards, Hartnell, Carle, Gagne, Coburn), and we had older players that were playing like their were younger (Briere, Pronger, Timonen). We had 4 lines of forwards and our top-2 defense pairs that knew their roles, and played their asses off for a smart coach. The only shortcomings for that team was a mediocre 3rd pair on the blueline and **** between pipes.I can't put into words how strongly I disagree with you on 2010. That was the poster child of a team that didn't belong there. On paper they were good enough that that was what was so infuriating about how horrible the product was in the ice.This was a team that just sleepwalking through the entire second half and actually rode their horrible ECHL goalie through stretches.They make the playoffs on a lucky and unlikely shootout win when they really didn't deserve to.They snuck through Boston because the Bruins lost their engine that could (still a terrific comeback but let's put it in perspective).This was not the 1987 team that lost to Edmonton. This was the team that snuck into the finals because other better teams unexpectedly stumbled and the flyers (to their credit) took advantage.They arguably could have won it all had a couple more bounces gone their way, but they were already well up in the good bounce column. Eventually the clock always strikes midnight on pretenders.And that's what the 2010 Flyers were. EDIT: IMO, the 2004 team and the 2000 teams that lost in the semis were both better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarsippius Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Yeah I think you and I have a pretty strong bias to that team. While they also got beaten by the better team (probably the best team ever) the one thing that stands out to me about them vs the 1997 and 2010 teams is that they were a more complete team who deserved to be there and didn't just happen to slide in at the right time. If Tim Kerr were there then who knows??? Sky was the limit and we probably would have won and not even be having this conversation. Agreed 2010 was what it was, but I did think the team was very good in 1997, just ran into that...er, choking situation. Which really isnt the reason they lost, Detroit was just that much better. They coulda played best of 47 and it still woulda been a sweep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.