EHM The Blue Line

batdad wrote:And oh Tasku--Yers is fine, cept the guy speaks so fast I cannot understand a word he says. I think he just repeats Nitty...mackie....Nitty Mackiee..>OLI OLI OLI JOKINNEN

Yeah, I know. Some of you foregnörs really have difficulties understanding Finnish at such high speeds. If he'd speak slower you'd definately know what he's saying, I know.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRvvfHQ0 ... re=related

WHat is really funny about that is he speaks so fast it appears his mouth is moving slower than the words are coming out. You Finns have sooooo many tälents.

Thank you very many. We make our best.

Lol, that guy went nuts.

Yeah. Antero Mertaranta is a celebrity of sorts here in Finland. He's always the first man to comment the international games. A fanatic Suomi-fan, doing his best at being unbiased in the commentary box.

Lakrisal wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jK21DKe0vk

nothing EVER beats that comeback though (;

"This video has been added to your favorites."

batdad wrote: Lakresal, Joe Helmer, Lidas...this is for you!!!

I don't need to say more than that.

About the commentator thing, the swedish commentators almost always tells us that the finnish commentator is going nuts when Finland scores in a game in World Championship.
But we are also proud of the commentator on the radio, here's one of his best:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJY-6BkpPq0

Sorry for that Tasku, but Batdad's movie made me wanting some revenge.

I'm not watching it. It's fake.

I love love love how I post something that Swedes find maddening, and they come back at Finns, not Canadians. WAHOO!! Maybe tomorrow night Joe you will have something on me...not bloody likely but maybe

Exactly what I was thinking...

batdad wrote:I love love love how I post something that Swedes find maddening, and they come back at Finns, not Canadians. WAHOO!! Maybe tomorrow night Joe you will have something on me...not bloody likely but maybe

Of course I will, or also I can give you this one! Doesn't matter if it is 15 years ago, the memory is still fresh.

Heh. Last night talking with my wife, I said I betcha it is Forsberg vs Hirsch the Swedes put up. I was like wup de doo....a shootout goal!!

Anyway, Archi gonna check in on this thread and get mad. Should be about the future of hockey.

And to that note: THe Phoenix Coyotes appear in trouble. The NHL is helping them out with payroll etc already. The NHL has an agreement that Phoenix cannot make any player transactions without first consulting the NHL. This is not good. This is a sign of big trouble.

They need to relocate to a real hockey market.

bruins72 wrote:They need to relocate to a real hockey market.

Somewhere north of the 40th would be a good start, preferrably north of the 49th........ or to Hamilton.

Yes, but other than Southern ONtario...where is a hockey market that will work. Canadian $ sucks again, so WInnipeg is not really an option. Same goes for Quebec City.

Not really sure...I am thinking we let two or three or four teams just pack it in.

I'd love to see the league contract! Cut 2 teams from each conference and re-align the divisions. Then have a lottery to determine a draft order with every team having an equal chance. Let the remaining teams draft their players and prospects. That would increase the talent level of the remaining teams (the same talent spread among less teams) and make the sport more competitive.

bruins72 wrote:They need to relocate to a real hockey market.

BRING BACK THE WHALE!

To be fair if Phoenix move it'll be to Kansas City because that is what Buttman has wanted for many years.

No Whalers! They couldn't draw a crowd when they had a team in Hartford before. They won't draw one now. The only time they seemed to have a good crowd was when they played the Bruins and that was because it wasn't that far for Bruins fans to drive. I remember back in the 80's I'd go to Bruins-Whalers games in Hartford (I had family in the area) and we'd get awesome seats for much cheaper than back home in Boston and it seemed like there were more Boston fans there than Whalers fans.

After all these years Bettman still hasn't figured out that hockey isn't the same as basketball. He thinks just because other sports may thrive in an area, that hockey will too. What was the other "hot spot" he's mentioned in the past? Wasn't it something in the Pacific Northwest US? Something in Washington or Oregon? Bleh!

Whalers have some charming hard core fans still though, and lets not forget about Brass Bonanza.

Both good reasons for wanting them back.

Seattle or Portland might not be bad. If only because it would kill off travel costs for other teams. Seattle in particular had some potential a couple of years ago. Not so sure about now though. Lets see how their junior team does in the new rink for a couple years

The least they could do is remove Nashville, Florida, and New York Islanders. Detroit would then be moved to the Eastern conference where they belong.

Winnipeg is a high doubt, because unfortunately their newest arena wasn't built up to NHL specifications. Hartford was the smallest market in the NHL before they relocated, and as previously stated their attendance figures depended on who their opponent was.

Quebec City had way too many things working against them, from also being one of the smallest markets to being a near strictly francophone league. This hurt them in regards to marketability and made many players skeptical to play for them. The Nordiques were a prime example of a small market Canadian club being handcuffed by Canadian dollar revenue but having to pay salaries in US dollars.

batdad wrote:Seattle or Portland might not be bad. If only because it would kill off travel costs for other teams. Seattle in particular had some potential a couple of years ago. Not so sure about now though. Lets see how their junior team does in the new rink for a couple years

Hmm, didn't you go and blast me with the big cannons when I said Portland might be a good place to place a NHL team some time ago?

The Hutch wrote:The least they could do is remove Nashville, Florida, and New York Islanders. Detroit would then be moved to the Eastern conference where they belong.

Detroit belong in the Central Division with Chicago and St. Louis, not in the East.
And don't touch teams with Stanley Cups like the Islanders, if anything trying to keep teams with a great history like that going should be a priority for the NHL.

Geographically, Detroit belongs in the Eastern conference. The fact that they can still dominate with their travel schedule is just another testament to their quality as a team. Come to think of it though, Columbus is just a HAIR farther east than Detroit, but both of whom are almost as far out east as Atlanta. Either way, I would much rather see Detroit have more games against the likes of the Leafs, Canadiens, Rangers, and Bruins than the Blues. Less games versus the Blackhawks would be unfortunate collateral damage.

As for the Islanders, I did consider the dynasty period but sadly what they were is long gone. What they are, however, is ever prevalent. They've been a sad sack franchise since forever, with some of the most notorious business decisions in NHL history, and not to mention a vastly outdated arena. Their time has come and gone, it's time the team left as well.

To be fair though, I was originally going to choose the Devils. They may have a more recent dynasty in the 90's, but they can't fill an arena outside of the playoffs to save their lives.

Yeah, I was more referring to Seattle as a potential one. Only reason to put a team in Portland is to save travel costs for a couple of Western teams (VAn, LA, Ana, SJ) It won't work in Portland I know.

A few years ago, either might have been okay. Portland has big problems with their arena and their junior team now that they did not have then. I just don't see it working. Seattle has way more potential, and not sure it would work there either. Looking at things from Nucks perspective, either place would be nice....