Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:

a joy

Ah, something krause knows nothing about.

-- Charlie

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. :)

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.

"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.

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.

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!)

"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?

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.

"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...

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?