Not quite there ^^ speedwise. 

I've been working on Dark Hollow  ....  I just got my wife to time me so I could compare my speed [cough, choke, cough] to Ms Wang's.   Following tab [considerable "fumbling," apparently my muscles aren't remembering a lot, so far]... the first four "segments" (?), about 22 notes, and well, well, well, whaddya know??? ... about  22 seconds.  

Better than 1 note every 2 seconds!

Jackie Alert!! She’s part of the crew doing the outdoor game at Wrigley.

quote:

---

Originally posted by chuckv97

Jackie Alert!! She’s part of the crew doing the outdoor game at Wrigley.

---

Indeed she was. And I must say that the 63" diagonal specs she was wearing did her no justice.

That was a fun game to watch. Yes, Chicago has a ways to go, but it's nice seeing the kid skate, and it's nice seeing the Captain (old friend Nick Foligno) still willing to mix it up.

Besides, good on Jim Montgomery. Obviously, something had to give in Boston (because Sweeney and Neeley will never leave the building unless they're defenestrated), but I'm a Montgomery fan, and wish him nothing but the best.

P.S.: same for Bruce Cassidy.

The Bruins have definitely had some quality coaches,, it’s too bad the higher-ups don’t realize it.
Jackie was her jovial self,, but yeah, those glasses…! Sheesh

quote:

---

Originally posted by chuckv97

The Bruins have definitely had some quality coaches,, it’s too bad the higher-ups don’t realize it.
Jackie was her jovial self,, but yeah, those glasses…! Sheesh

---

I can forgive her the Big Puffy Coat. 'Twas chilly at Wrigley. But those glasses didn't help reveal those baby blues.

What the higher ups in Boston don't realize is that they're a big part of the problem.

quote:

---

Originally posted by eagleisland

quote:

---

Originally posted by chuckv97

The Bruins have definitely had some quality coaches,, it’s too bad the higher-ups don’t realize it.
Jackie was her jovial self,, but yeah, those glasses…! Sheesh

---

I can forgive her the Big Puffy Coat. 'Twas chilly at Wrigley. But those glasses didn't help reveal those baby blues.

What the higher ups in Boston don't realize is that they're a big part of the problem.

---

Who owns the team? Are they/he in cahoots with the Sweeney/Neely agenda.. whatever that may be?

quote:

---

Originally posted by chuckv97

 

---

Who owns the team? Are they/he in cahoots with the Sweeney/Neely agenda.. whatever that may be?

---

The Jacobs family, who own Delaware North (the team may technically be owned by Delaware North, but the difference is immaterial). Delaware North owns TD Garden (the arena hosting the Bruins and the Celtics) and all of the F&B therein. Their F&B holdings include SkyChefs, which services many major airports; concessions in American national parks (including Yosemite) and food concessions in domestic and international arenas including Wembley Park in the UK and numerous arenas serving the NFL and MLB.

They also own and operate resorts and some smaller-market gambling operations.

There doesn't seem to be any great hurry to sack Sweeney and/or Neeley. There's almost always a set of cheeks in every seat at the Gahden when the Bruins are in town. And the Jacobs are pretty powerful in the NHL's Board of Governors.

Oh, and as regards the Sweeney/Neeley agenda, if there is one: seems to me that they're both retired hockey players who managed to secure gigs that pay better than they did when they were playing. So their agenda, it seems to me, is to protect their jobs. And as long as the fan base remains fired up and sales are good, I don't see much change on the horizon - even though probably half of Boston's fan base would like to see them dragged through dung on Causeway Street.

I always find it interesting when it successful business people own a badly-run sports team. Pal Hal (Harold Ballard) being a prime example with the Leafs in the 1970’s and 80’s. Of course, he was hands on,, I gather the Jacobs family are arms-length.

quote:

---

Originally posted by chuckv97

I always find it interesting when it successful business people own a badly-run sports team. Pal Hal (Harold Ballard) being a prime example with the Leafs in the 1970’s and 80’s. Of course, he was hands on,, I gather the Jacobs family are arms-length.

---

They are, and your point is well-taken. Consider, for example, the Dallas Cowboys. Or, for that matter, the New England Patriots, once the Krafts started messing with Belichick. Don't even get me started with the Red Sox (who, just in case you missed it, are owned by the same outfit that owns the Pittsburgh Penguins. What the hell is Mario Lemieux supposed to do in the face of that?).

Even so, ownership controls the relationship with the Team President (Neeley), and Neeley is at least technically responsible for Sweeney. Us Noo Winglanders may have a misguided sense of our entitlement to major sports championships, but we do at least want to see some effort.

'Tis the season....

 ^^ precipitated by ____________ ??

quote:

---

Originally posted by Owen

 ^^ precipitated by ____________ ??

---

Not sure,, just thinking Foligno wanted to energize the team since they were getting beat badly.  Schenn didn't have to oblige but I guess his ego got the better of him. 

".... energize the team"????    I've never played at a particularly high level, but as far as I'm concerned that rationale is a load of crap.   IF that's the case it's too bad Schenn didn't knock him into the middle of next week .... show him the error of his ways, so to speak.

... Leaving Schenn's ego, or lack of ego, out of it,  is "energizing the team" a legitimate justification for fighting?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Owen

".... energize the team"????    I've never played at a particularly high level, but as far as I'm concerned that rationale is a load of crap.   IF that's the case it's too bad Schenn didn't knock him into the middle of next week .... show him the error of his ways, so to speak.

... Leaving Schenn's ego, or lack of ego, out of it,  is "energizing the team" a legitimate justification for fighting?

Well, I've heard from players in interviews saying that obviously a good tilt will obviously wake up the hungover energy line, so to speak.

Fighting to "energize" a team is another one of my pet peeves,, it's like those pre-arranged fights,,, goon against goon. Knuckledraggers (I'm admitting I had some of that before I started pining for the graceful, beautiful game) in the crowd love it and Bettman puts another feather in his cap. Be that as it may, Nick Foligno being from the East (born in Buffalo, family originally from Sudbury) &  Schenn from Saskabush, it's just another spillover from rancourous Canadian politics. 

 

---

You're confusing me Chuck. I'm not going back to check, but I'm pretty sure you've defended the "energize the team" rationale in the past, along with "protecting a team's assets."   You're the only person I know who's opposed to fighting but uses euphemisms that typically are the purview of those that  support it ... dropping da mitts, chucking 'em, chicklets, etc.

IMNSHumbleO,  IF Foligno did challenge Schenn, that's the salient issue, not Schenn's ego or Canadian politics.  Am I wrong?

Btw, re. the beautiful game you mention ^^ , was there ever an era where that style of play was the order of the day in the NHL?

I don’t remember extolling the virtues of fighting, energizing, assets , etc, but if I did it was before my conversion experience on the road to the Damascus of hockey, namely Ottawa , where Lord Stanley looked out the window and witnessed his sons playing the beautiful game on the Rideau Canal and was so overtaken by the experience that he decided to donate a Cup for championship teams.
I suppose that’s when hockey was still pristine,, the hotheads and their fists came later, forever poisoning the waters.

I don't remember you extolling the virtues either, but I see a b-i-g diff between that and accepting [even grudgingly] something.   When you hear players/commentators saying a "good tilt etc." , do you accept that rationale [and terminology], or do you speak against it?   What makes a tilt a good tilt and/or a not good tilt?

So, from the broken record dept., is the nub of the issue ....  a player issuing a challenge or another player accepting it?  

Forever poisoning the waters sounds a lot like "opposition is futile."

No, I don’t care for the “good tilt” jargon,, sometimes I even throw open my window and yell out “I’ve had it up to here and I’m not taking it any more!!”
I can’t speak for commentators or players as to their definitions of good or poor tilts,, I suppose the “beauty” is in the eye of the beholder.
Not sure about the nub,,, seems like it’s usually a player issuing the challenge, although the fights sometimes just explode out of thin air without us observers detecting any pugnacious precursors.

".... usually a player issuing the challenge, ..." Thank you.  [Man was that easy, er what?!?!? ]

Now IF the challenge stems from a guy running off at the mouth ..............  ??   

quote:

---

Originally posted by chuckv97

quote:

---

Originally posted by Owen

 ^^ precipitated by ____________ ??

---

Not sure,, just thinking Foligno wanted to energize the team since they were getting beat badly.  Schenn didn't have to oblige but I guess his ego got the better of him. 

---

From The Hockey News:

As my colleague Lou Korac from The Hockey News Blues site reported, it was Schenn who asked Foligno to drop the gloves. He wanted the memory of fighting at the Winter Classic.

Thanks Skip ... I hadn't considered that.  Maybe b.s. like that [i.e. Schenn wanting the memory] is what DC had in mind when saying that hockey players are "the best" [or whatever his terminology was].

So I'd like to reverse my "wish"  ... too bad Foligno didn't show Schenn the error of his [i.e. Schenn's] ways. 

Edit: Fwiw,  I'm a proponent of instigators [whatever the vehicle] getting some extra minutes [i.e. in the penalty box, not extra minutes of ice time]. 

Edit #2: I think I'm more fixated on seeing accountability, but like Tom says, I ask [expect??] no agreement.  Was Foligno wrong for NOT laughing it off or chirping back, or waving it off dismissively?

Interesting,, I saw them
talking before the puck drop, but figured it was Foligno challenging him.
An outdoor fight is a good memory?… oh well, boys will be boys

Methinks you are fixated on retribution for running off at the mouth, Owen. I still fail to see much in that cuz it’s ongoing and guys often laugh it off or chirp back, or wave it off dismissingly.