I'll bet you...
 

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:

Check your email.

I'll bet you...
 

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 02:10:37 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

And my first action will be to change the size of the hockey puck to
the size of a dinner plate so you can actually see the damned thing on
TV. :)

Whatever happened to those electronically augmented pucks you could
actually see?

TV hockey has gone from the days of B/W where you could almost never
see the puck, to color TV where you could sometimes see it, to large
screen HD where you can see it about 80% of the time.

I'll bet you...
 

On Apr 20, 10:33*pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 02:10:37 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing

wrote:
And my first action will be to change the size of the hockey puck to
the size of a dinner plate so you can actually see the damned thing on
TV. *:)

Whatever happened to those electronically augmented pucks you could
actually see?

TV hockey has gone from the days of B/W where you could almost never
see the puck, to color TV where you could sometimes see it, to large
screen HD where you can see it about 80% of the time. *

Wayne, that's fine but who really cares about the puck? At a hockey
game people want to see blood..

I'll bet you...
 

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:49:12 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
"Reggie is Here wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 16:44:41 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

Why just blame Bush? Seems as if Congress, Repub and Dem have been
overspending and borrowing from China for years. Blame the Senators
also.
The 3 running for POTUS are all guilty of overspending.

Ah who cares.

Just print up some more money. :)

If we keep using corn to make biofuel, we are all going to have to print
our own money just to go to the supermarket.

Want to solve that problem quickly?

We went from having a 15 month supply of corn/wheat and soybeans to
barely keeping up with demand. It's getting to the point where ethanol
has sucked up all the supply of available feed and food grains and
we're at 3 months currently.

Solution: Quit using ethanol.

If the FED and SEC don't get control of the proliferation of hedge
funds and too much money chasing too little profit forcing the funds
into commodities, you will get severe economic dislocation.

Solution: Increase capital gains on hedge fund profits. For pete's
sake, George Soros made 3 billion dollars with his fund last year
which is more than the GDP of the 15 world's poorest economies
combined.

Solution #2: In lieu of capital gains on hedging in commodities, if
investment money is rerouted into housing and infrastructure, all is
forgiven.

However, nobody listens to me. :)

PS: I called this current food issue two years ago.

Nobody listened to me then either. :)

Everybody related to SWMBO?

I'll bet you...
 

On Apr 20, 11:37*pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in messagenews:7nrn04tevqo39i5m1dku7loc8592b9tnok@4ax .com...





On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:49:12 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
"Reggie is Here wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 16:44:41 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

Why just blame Bush? *Seems as if Congress, Repub and Dem have been
overspending and borrowing from China for years. *Blame the Senators
also.
The 3 running for POTUS are all guilty of overspending.

Ah who cares.

Just print up some more money. *:)

If we keep using corn to make biofuel, we are all going to have to print
our own money just to go to the supermarket.

Want to solve that problem quickly?

We went from having a 15 month supply of corn/wheat and soybeans to
barely keeping up with demand. It's getting to the point where ethanol
has sucked up all the supply of available feed and food grains and
we're at 3 months currently.

Solution: Quit using ethanol.

If the FED and SEC don't get control of the proliferation of hedge
funds and too much money chasing too little profit forcing the funds
into commodities, you will get severe economic dislocation.

Solution: Increase capital gains on hedge fund profits. *For pete's
sake, George Soros made 3 billion dollars with his fund last year
which is more than the GDP of the 15 world's poorest economies
combined.

Solution #2: In lieu of capital gains on hedging in commodities, if
investment money is rerouted into housing and infrastructure, all is
forgiven.

However, nobody listens to me. *:)

PS: I called this current food issue two years ago.

Nobody listened to me then either. *:)

Everybody related to SWMBO?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

i have a SWBMO. I like it that way. She makes a heck of a lot more
money than I do.

I'll bet you...
 

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:54:26 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Apr 20, 10:33?pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 02:10:37 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing

wrote:
And my first action will be to change the size of the hockey puck to
the size of a dinner plate so you can actually see the damned thing on
TV. ?:)

Whatever happened to those electronically augmented pucks you could
actually see?

TV hockey has gone from the days of B/W where you could almost never
see the puck, to color TV where you could sometimes see it, to large
screen HD where you can see it about 80% of the time. ?

Wayne, that's fine but who really cares about the puck? At a hockey
game people want to see blood..

Went to fight and a hockey game broke out.
The fighting is what killed what feeble interest I had in it.
I'm a fight fan when they're wearing trunks and a mouthpiece.
But not seeing the puck was always a pain in the ass.

--Vic

I'll bet you...
 

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 23:27:56 -0300, "Don White"
wrote:


"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 23:02:22 -0300, "Don White"
wrote:


"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:49:12 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
"Reggie is Here wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 16:44:41 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

Why just blame Bush? Seems as if Congress, Repub and Dem have been
overspending and borrowing from China for years. Blame the Senators
also.
The 3 running for POTUS are all guilty of overspending.

Ah who cares.

Just print up some more money. :)

If we keep using corn to make biofuel, we are all going to have to print
our own money just to go to the supermarket.

Want to solve that problem quickly?

We went from having a 15 month supply of corn/wheat and soybeans to
barely keeping up with demand. It's getting to the point where ethanol
has sucked up all the supply of available feed and food grains and
we're at 3 months currently.

Solution: Quit using ethanol.

If the FED and SEC don't get control of the proliferation of hedge
funds and too much money chasing too little profit forcing the funds
into commodities, you will get severe economic dislocation.

Solution: Increase capital gains on hedge fund profits. For pete's
sake, George Soros made 3 billion dollars with his fund last year
which is more than the GDP of the 15 world's poorest economies
combined.

Solution #2: In lieu of capital gains on hedging in commodities, if
investment money is rerouted into housing and infrastructure, all is
forgiven.

However, nobody listens to me. :)

PS: I called this current food issue two years ago.

Nobody listened to me then either. :)

I nominate Tom Francis for President of the US....
heck..let's go all the way.. how about Prime Minister of Canada?

I accept.

Benevolent Dictatorship - you may call me Most High Holy and
Resplendent Emperor.

And my first action will be to change the size of the hockey puck to
the size of a dinner plate so you can actually see the damned thing on
TV. :)


Don't tell me you're one of those wacky Americans who encouraged FOX tv to
develop that glow/laser puck a while back.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FoxTrax

Well, if it hadn't been for you lousy conservative reactionary
Canadians who insisted on "purity of the sport", FoxTrax would be the
rule of the day.

Hell, I have HD and am a hockey fan familiar with the sport and the
puck is still hard to see.

In this case, you really can blame Canada. :)

I'll bet you...
 

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 19:41:18 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Apr 20, 9:27*pm, "Don White" wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in messagenews:4ntn04l42ad0qihe8utr0cgacsd2e35scv@4ax .com...





On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 23:02:22 -0300, "Don White"
wrote:

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:49:12 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
"Reggie is Here wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 16:44:41 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

Why just blame Bush? *Seems as if Congress, Repub and Dem have been
overspending and borrowing from China for years. *Blame the Senators
also.
The 3 running for POTUS are all guilty of overspending.

Ah who cares.

Just print up some more money. *:)

If we keep using corn to make biofuel, we are all going to have to print
our own money just to go to the supermarket.

Want to solve that problem quickly?

We went from having a 15 month supply of corn/wheat and soybeans to
barely keeping up with demand. It's getting to the point where ethanol
has sucked up all the supply of available feed and food grains and
we're at 3 months currently.

Solution: Quit using ethanol.

If the FED and SEC don't get control of the proliferation of hedge
funds and too much money chasing too little profit forcing the funds
into commodities, you will get severe economic dislocation.

Solution: Increase capital gains on hedge fund profits. *For pete's
sake, George Soros made 3 billion dollars with his fund last year
which is more than the GDP of the 15 world's poorest economies
combined.

Solution #2: In lieu of capital gains on hedging in commodities, if
investment money is rerouted into housing and infrastructure, all is
forgiven.

However, nobody listens to me. *:)

PS: I called this current food issue two years ago.

Nobody listened to me then either. *:)

I nominate Tom Francis for President of the US....
heck..let's go all the way.. how about Prime Minister of Canada?

I accept.

Benevolent Dictatorship - you may call me Most High Holy and
Resplendent Emperor.

And my first action will be to change the size of the hockey puck to
the size of a dinner plate so you can actually see the damned thing on
TV. *:)

Don't tell me you're one of those wacky Americans who encouraged FOX tv to
develop that glow/laser puck a while back.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FoxTrax- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Glowing puck. for night hockey?

Uh, I don't think I'd like that.... not one bit.

Never saw FoxTrax? It was pretty cool actually - it followed the puck
around the ice with a little blue trail so you could follow it.

Unfortunately, those lousy reactionary conservative Canadians thought
it looked to "flashy".

Hey, wait a minute - you aren't a Canadian are you?

Hmmmm....don't like FoxTrax - Canadians don't like it - Tim doesn't
like it...

Well, I'll be danged - the evidence is clear.

I can blame Tim AND Canada....

I'll bet you...
 

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 23:33:01 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 02:10:37 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

And my first action will be to change the size of the hockey puck to
the size of a dinner plate so you can actually see the damned thing on
TV. :)

Whatever happened to those electronically augmented pucks you could
actually see?

TV hockey has gone from the days of B/W where you could almost never
see the puck, to color TV where you could sometimes see it, to large
screen HD where you can see it about 80% of the time.

Actually, I agree with the HD thing - you can see it pretty well, but
it's more than just HD.

I was reading something a year or so ago (maybe more - it was right
after the strike was resolved) that the NHL changed the tint on the
ice a little and made the puck blacker somehow using a new black
reference standard.

I still liked FoxTrax.

I'll bet you...
 

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:54:26 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Apr 20, 10:33*pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 02:10:37 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing

wrote:
And my first action will be to change the size of the hockey puck to
the size of a dinner plate so you can actually see the damned thing on
TV. *:)

Whatever happened to those electronically augmented pucks you could
actually see?

TV hockey has gone from the days of B/W where you could almost never
see the puck, to color TV where you could sometimes see it, to large
screen HD where you can see it about 80% of the time. *

Wayne, that's fine but who really cares about the puck? At a hockey
game people want to see blood..

There's hope for you yet. :)

I'll bet you...
 

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 01:59:12 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:54:26 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Apr 20, 10:33?pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 02:10:37 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing

wrote:
And my first action will be to change the size of the hockey puck to
the size of a dinner plate so you can actually see the damned thing on
TV. ?:)

Whatever happened to those electronically augmented pucks you could
actually see?

TV hockey has gone from the days of B/W where you could almost never
see the puck, to color TV where you could sometimes see it, to large
screen HD where you can see it about 80% of the time. ?

Wayne, that's fine but who really cares about the puck? At a hockey
game people want to see blood..

Went to fight and a hockey game broke out.
The fighting is what killed what feeble interest I had in it.
I'm a fight fan when they're wearing trunks and a mouthpiece.
But not seeing the puck was always a pain in the ass.

Hockey was, note the was, a violent contact sport and the occasional
fighting was a huge part of the game - part of the reason you watched
hockey.

When they changed the rules to make hockey more "family" friendly
discouraging fighting, hard cross checking and boarding (because of
the namby pamby crowd opposed to "violence") the viewership and
attendance went down.

Now that these aspects of the sport are returning, viewership is going
up slightly and attendance is improving. Of course part of this is
that the sport has a diluted talent pool and too many teams in the
NHL. In my opinion, hockey needs to pulll back to the original 16
teams - 20 max. Seriously, who needs hockey in Arizona? Or Los
Angeles?

I'll bet you...
 

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 21:37:20 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:


"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:49:12 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
"Reggie is Here wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 16:44:41 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

Why just blame Bush? Seems as if Congress, Repub and Dem have been
overspending and borrowing from China for years. Blame the Senators
also.
The 3 running for POTUS are all guilty of overspending.

Ah who cares.

Just print up some more money. :)

If we keep using corn to make biofuel, we are all going to have to print
our own money just to go to the supermarket.

Want to solve that problem quickly?

We went from having a 15 month supply of corn/wheat and soybeans to
barely keeping up with demand. It's getting to the point where ethanol
has sucked up all the supply of available feed and food grains and
we're at 3 months currently.

Solution: Quit using ethanol.

If the FED and SEC don't get control of the proliferation of hedge
funds and too much money chasing too little profit forcing the funds
into commodities, you will get severe economic dislocation.

Solution: Increase capital gains on hedge fund profits. For pete's
sake, George Soros made 3 billion dollars with his fund last year
which is more than the GDP of the 15 world's poorest economies
combined.

Solution #2: In lieu of capital gains on hedging in commodities, if
investment money is rerouted into housing and infrastructure, all is
forgiven.

However, nobody listens to me. :)

PS: I called this current food issue two years ago.

Nobody listened to me then either. :)

Everybody related to SWMBO?

We all relate to SWMBO.

I'll bet you...
 

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:54:26 -0700 (PDT), NowIn my opinion, hockey needs
to pulll back to the original 16
teams - 20 max. Seriously, who needs hockey in Arizona? Or Los
Angeles?

Until the expansion in 1967 there were 6 teams in the original NHL ;-

I'll bet you...
 

"Jim" wrote in message
...

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:54:26 -0700 (PDT), NowIn my opinion, hockey
needs to pulll back to the original 16
teams - 20 max. Seriously, who needs hockey in Arizona? Or Los
Angeles?

Until the expansion in 1967 there were 6 teams in the original NHL ;-


Now that was hockey. None of this namby, pamby diluted B.S. Six teams:

Chicago (my home town)
Boston
Detroit
NY
Montreal
Toronto

Another sport ruined by expansion.

I'll bet you...
 

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 06:27:22 -0400, "Jim" wrote:


"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
.. .

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:54:26 -0700 (PDT), NowIn my opinion, hockey needs
to pulll back to the original 16
teams - 20 max. Seriously, who needs hockey in Arizona? Or Los
Angeles?

Until the expansion in 1967 there were 6 teams in the original NHL ;-

You are absoutely 100% Grade A1 Top Shelf Best of Breed Whoo Hoo Magoo
correct.

Don't know how that one slipped in there.

I'll bet you...
 

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 06:41:16 -0400, "D.Duck" wrote:


"Jim" wrote in message
...

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:54:26 -0700 (PDT), NowIn my opinion, hockey
needs to pulll back to the original 16
teams - 20 max. Seriously, who needs hockey in Arizona? Or Los
Angeles?

Until the expansion in 1967 there were 6 teams in the original NHL ;-


Now that was hockey. None of this namby, pamby diluted B.S. Six teams:

Chicago (my home town)

Blackhawks.

Boston

Bruins

Detroit

Red Wings

NY

Rangers

Montreal

Les Canadiens de Montréal - who suck - damned Frenchies.

Toronto

Maple Leafs who don't suck because their official name is in English.

Another sport ruined by expansion.

Well, I can honestly say that the original six teams were helped by
some expansion - adding Pittsburgh and Phildelphia didn't hurt the
league at all. I thought bringing it up to ten teams was a good idea
actually.

And there should have been two more Canadian teams to bring the league
up to some kind of national parity.

I'll bet you...
 

On Apr 21, 5:41*am, "D.Duck" wrote:
"Jim" wrote in message

...



"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
.. .

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:54:26 -0700 (PDT), NowIn my opinion, hockey
needs to pulll back to the original 16
teams - 20 max. *Seriously, who needs hockey in Arizona? *Or Los
Angeles?

Until the expansion in 1967 there were 6 teams in the original NHL ;-

Now that was hockey. *None of this namby, pamby diluted B.S. *Six teams:

Chicago (my home town)
Boston
Detroit
NY
Montreal
Toronto

Another sport ruined by expansion.


yes, and now you have my "local team in there as well. the St. Louis
Blues. do they win anything any more?

I'll bet you...
 

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 10:11:26 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 01:59:12 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:54:26 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Apr 20, 10:33?pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 02:10:37 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing

wrote:
And my first action will be to change the size of the hockey puck to
the size of a dinner plate so you can actually see the damned thing on
TV. ?:)

Whatever happened to those electronically augmented pucks you could
actually see?

TV hockey has gone from the days of B/W where you could almost never
see the puck, to color TV where you could sometimes see it, to large
screen HD where you can see it about 80% of the time. ?

Wayne, that's fine but who really cares about the puck? At a hockey
game people want to see blood..

Went to fight and a hockey game broke out.
The fighting is what killed what feeble interest I had in it.
I'm a fight fan when they're wearing trunks and a mouthpiece.
But not seeing the puck was always a pain in the ass.

Hockey was, note the was, a violent contact sport and the occasional
fighting was a huge part of the game - part of the reason you watched
hockey.

Not me. I watched for good skating, passing and shooting, whether a
slam or finessed with passing. Hard checking and boarding has always
been a part of hockey, and never bothered real hockey players.
Once the gloves came off I was bored, because hockey players fighting
is no more fun to watch than a baseball diamond pile-up.
Sometime in the '70's the fighting was encouraged by official neglect,
and outside of Gretzky the game went to hell.
Might be wrong, because when the "fighters" became the stars I quit
watching.

When they changed the rules to make hockey more "family" friendly
discouraging fighting, hard cross checking and boarding (because of
the namby pamby crowd opposed to "violence") the viewership and
attendance went down.

I never got back to watching it, but my impression is the opposite.
Started meeting a number of women who went to Blackhawk games and I
thought the cleanup had improved attendance.
But that was just an impression.

Now that these aspects of the sport are returning, viewership is going
up slightly and attendance is improving. Of course part of this is
that the sport has a diluted talent pool and too many teams in the
NHL. In my opinion, hockey needs to pulll back to the original 16
teams - 20 max. Seriously, who needs hockey in Arizona? Or Los
Angeles?

Well, the mayors of Peoria and Decatur and their chambers of commerce
would probably beg to disagree.
Team sports is just a business now. That's my take, anyway.

--Vic

I'll bet you...
 

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 23:27:56 -0300, "Don White"
wrote:


"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 23:02:22 -0300, "Don White"
wrote:


"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
m...
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:49:12 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
"Reggie is Here wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 16:44:41 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

Why just blame Bush? Seems as if Congress, Repub and Dem have been
overspending and borrowing from China for years. Blame the
Senators
also.
The 3 running for POTUS are all guilty of overspending.

Ah who cares.

Just print up some more money. :)

If we keep using corn to make biofuel, we are all going to have to
print
our own money just to go to the supermarket.

Want to solve that problem quickly?

We went from having a 15 month supply of corn/wheat and soybeans to
barely keeping up with demand. It's getting to the point where ethanol
has sucked up all the supply of available feed and food grains and
we're at 3 months currently.

Solution: Quit using ethanol.

If the FED and SEC don't get control of the proliferation of hedge
funds and too much money chasing too little profit forcing the funds
into commodities, you will get severe economic dislocation.

Solution: Increase capital gains on hedge fund profits. For pete's
sake, George Soros made 3 billion dollars with his fund last year
which is more than the GDP of the 15 world's poorest economies
combined.

Solution #2: In lieu of capital gains on hedging in commodities, if
investment money is rerouted into housing and infrastructure, all is
forgiven.

However, nobody listens to me. :)

PS: I called this current food issue two years ago.

Nobody listened to me then either. :)

I nominate Tom Francis for President of the US....
heck..let's go all the way.. how about Prime Minister of Canada?

I accept.

Benevolent Dictatorship - you may call me Most High Holy and
Resplendent Emperor.

And my first action will be to change the size of the hockey puck to
the size of a dinner plate so you can actually see the damned thing on
TV. :)


Don't tell me you're one of those wacky Americans who encouraged FOX tv to
develop that glow/laser puck a while back.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FoxTrax

Well, if it hadn't been for you lousy conservative reactionary
Canadians who insisted on "purity of the sport", FoxTrax would be the
rule of the day.

Hell, I have HD and am a hockey fan familiar with the sport and the
puck is still hard to see.

In this case, you really can blame Canada. :)

Hey.. we're just plain, basic, down to earth meat & potatoes kind of folk.
We don't do 'flashy' so don't mess with our hockey.

I'll bet you...
 

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
snip
Not me. I watched for good skating, passing and shooting, whether a
slam or finessed with passing. Hard checking and boarding has always
been a part of hockey, and never bothered real hockey players.
Once the gloves came off I was bored, because hockey players fighting
is no more fun to watch than a baseball diamond pile-up.
Sometime in the '70's the fighting was encouraged by official neglect,
and outside of Gretzky the game went to hell.
Might be wrong, because when the "fighters" became the stars I quit
watching.

snip....


I'd like to see the ice surface expanded to International size. That should
help the skating finess part of the game.
After all , the players are much bigger & faster than the old timers...why
not more room for the talented to show their stuff.
A big surface would certainly help Montreal in the current series with
gritty Boston bruins, who seem to be able to block and dog the usually
faster Canadien players.

I'll bet you...
 

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:

a joy

Ah, something krause knows nothing about.

-- Charlie

I'll bet you...
 

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 07:24:40 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

Not me. I watched for good skating, passing and shooting, whether a
slam or finessed with passing.

Yeah yeah - and you read Playboy for the articles.

Sure - I buy that. :)

I'll bet you...
 

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 09:57:25 -0300, "Don White"
wrote:

A big surface would certainly help Montreal in the current series with
gritty Boston bruins, who seem to be able to block and dog the usually
faster Canadien players.

Well they are French Canadians and as such, being French, losing wars
and sports all the time.

Get it - Canadians? Montreal? French?

~~ snerk ~~

I agree with you - the rinks should be brought up to International
standards.

It would open the game up a lot.

I'll bet you...
 

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 01:59:12 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:54:26 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Apr 20, 10:33?pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 02:10:37 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing

wrote:
And my first action will be to change the size of the hockey puck to
the size of a dinner plate so you can actually see the damned thing on
TV. ?:)

Whatever happened to those electronically augmented pucks you could
actually see?

TV hockey has gone from the days of B/W where you could almost never
see the puck, to color TV where you could sometimes see it, to large
screen HD where you can see it about 80% of the time. ?

Wayne, that's fine but who really cares about the puck? At a hockey
game people want to see blood..

Went to fight and a hockey game broke out.
The fighting is what killed what feeble interest I had in it.
I'm a fight fan when they're wearing trunks and a mouthpiece.
But not seeing the puck was always a pain in the ass.

Hockey was, note the was, a violent contact sport and the occasional
fighting was a huge part of the game - part of the reason you watched
hockey.

When they changed the rules to make hockey more "family" friendly
discouraging fighting, hard cross checking and boarding (because of
the namby pamby crowd opposed to "violence") the viewership and
attendance went down.

Now that these aspects of the sport are returning, viewership is going
up slightly and attendance is improving. Of course part of this is
that the sport has a diluted talent pool and too many teams in the
NHL. In my opinion, hockey needs to pulll back to the original 16
teams - 20 max. Seriously, who needs hockey in Arizona? Or Los
Angeles?

But expansion and the minor leagues were good for my Son In Law. He was the
operations manager for a Minor league team for a few years. So I could get
seats right behind the goal, and get up close look at the player getting
slamed against the glass.

I'll bet you...
 

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 11:37:27 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

But expansion and the minor leagues were good for my Son In Law. He was the
operations manager for a Minor league team for a few years. So I could get
seats right behind the goal, and get up close look at the player getting
slamed against the glass.

Minor league systems are important and that's where all the
development should be done - not at the Major level.

I'll bet you...
 

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:39:04 -0400, DK wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 05:19:56 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Apr 19, 11:23 pm, "William Bruce" wrote:
Maybe if one of you had taken and passed a college course...in anything.
Hey Krausie, been to any Yale alumni meetings lately?
He took his 36' Zimmerman like lobster boat there. And he got a
"fireboat welcome" in NYC.

....stop this crap!

John,

This is the same asshole (with his puppies Don and JimH) who attacks you
on regular basis. He will go away when the BS runs out and he alienates
the shortlist of "friends" he has here. Richard put up with his ****
for years and finally gave up and he is a very passive guy. It's only a
matter of time.

You think?

I think he thrives on the 'back talk' and enjoys seeing his name in lights.
--
John *H*
(Not the other one!)

I'll bet you...
 

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:39:04 -0400, DK wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 05:19:56 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Apr 19, 11:23 pm, "William Bruce" wrote:
Maybe if one of you had taken and passed a college course...in
anything.
Hey Krausie, been to any Yale alumni meetings lately?
He took his 36' Zimmerman like lobster boat there. And he got a
"fireboat welcome" in NYC.

....stop this crap!

John,

This is the same asshole (with his puppies Don and JimH) who attacks you
on regular basis. He will go away when the BS runs out and he alienates
the shortlist of "friends" he has here. Richard put up with his ****
for years and finally gave up and he is a very passive guy. It's only a
matter of time.

You think?

I think he thrives on the 'back talk' and enjoys seeing his name in
lights.
--
John *H*
(Not the other one!)

Thought you'd come back from your 'Goofy holiday' all relaxed & mellow.
Why stir up these old dead threads?

I'll bet you...
 

Don White wrote:
"John H." wrote in message
...
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:39:04 -0400, DK wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 05:19:56 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Apr 19, 11:23 pm, "William Bruce" wrote:
Maybe if one of you had taken and passed a college course...in
anything.
Hey Krausie, been to any Yale alumni meetings lately?
He took his 36' Zimmerman like lobster boat there. And he got a
"fireboat welcome" in NYC.
....stop this crap!
John,

This is the same asshole (with his puppies Don and JimH) who attacks you
on regular basis. He will go away when the BS runs out and he alienates
the shortlist of "friends" he has here. Richard put up with his ****
for years and finally gave up and he is a very passive guy. It's only a
matter of time.
You think?

I think he thrives on the 'back talk' and enjoys seeing his name in
lights.
--
John *H*
(Not the other one!)

Thought you'd come back from your 'Goofy holiday' all relaxed & mellow.
Why stir up these old dead threads?



Why do you follow Harry like a puppy? Why do you post nothing but lame
bull****?

Go back and read your posts. Would you share them with your wife? Your
friends?

The simple answer should be NO unless you surround yourself with
childish morons.

BTW - I know you can read this. Really.

I'll bet you...
 

"DK" wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"John H." wrote in message
...
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:39:04 -0400, DK wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 05:19:56 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Apr 19, 11:23 pm, "William Bruce" wrote:
Maybe if one of you had taken and passed a college course...in
anything.
Hey Krausie, been to any Yale alumni meetings lately?
He took his 36' Zimmerman like lobster boat there. And he got a
"fireboat welcome" in NYC.
....stop this crap!
John,

This is the same asshole (with his puppies Don and JimH) who attacks
you
on regular basis. He will go away when the BS runs out and he
alienates
the shortlist of "friends" he has here. Richard put up with his ****
for years and finally gave up and he is a very passive guy. It's only
a
matter of time.
You think?

I think he thrives on the 'back talk' and enjoys seeing his name in
lights.
--
John *H*
(Not the other one!)

Thought you'd come back from your 'Goofy holiday' all relaxed & mellow.
Why stir up these old dead threads?

Why do you follow Harry like a puppy? Why do you post nothing but lame
bull****?

Go back and read your posts. Would you share them with your wife? Your
friends?

The simple answer should be NO unless you surround yourself with childish
morons.

BTW - I know you can read this. Really.

Not for long... back you go down the crapper...

I'll bet you...
 

Don White wrote:
"DK" wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"John H." wrote in message
...
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:39:04 -0400, DK wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 05:19:56 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Apr 19, 11:23 pm, "William Bruce" wrote:
Maybe if one of you had taken and passed a college course...in
anything.
Hey Krausie, been to any Yale alumni meetings lately?
He took his 36' Zimmerman like lobster boat there. And he got a
"fireboat welcome" in NYC.
....stop this crap!
John,

This is the same asshole (with his puppies Don and JimH) who attacks
you
on regular basis. He will go away when the BS runs out and he
alienates
the shortlist of "friends" he has here. Richard put up with his ****
for years and finally gave up and he is a very passive guy. It's only
a
matter of time.
You think?

I think he thrives on the 'back talk' and enjoys seeing his name in
lights.
--
John *H*
(Not the other one!)
Thought you'd come back from your 'Goofy holiday' all relaxed & mellow.
Why stir up these old dead threads?
Why do you follow Harry like a puppy? Why do you post nothing but lame
bull****?

Go back and read your posts. Would you share them with your wife? Your
friends?

The simple answer should be NO unless you surround yourself with childish
morons.

BTW - I know you can read this. Really.

Not for long... back you go down the crapper...



We can play this game for a long time, Donnie. Why aren't you posting
at Chuck's place? Nothing relevant to offer?