larry brooks article

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: larry brooks article

    In Response to Re: larry brooks article:
    In Response to Re: larry brooks article : When did Lucic supposedly go "out of his way to thank and praise " Evander Kane?He probably sent him a fruit basket too I suppose.I look forward to the day you post something positive about the Bruins that has nothing to do with the seventies.I miss those days too but they aren't coming back-ever.
    Posted by dezaruchi


    It's documented that Lucic sent Kane a text thanking him.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: larry brooks article

    In Response to Re: larry brooks article:
    In Response to Re: larry brooks article : It's documented that Lucic sent Kane a text thanking him.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot

    So is that going out of his way to thank and praise him?Even with his big fingers,texting shouldn't be that hard for Lucic.I bet he got lots of texts from lots of players regarding the Cooke KO.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: larry brooks article

    In Response to Re: larry brooks article:
    In Response to Re: larry brooks article : So is that going out of his way to thank and praise him?Even with his big fingers,texting shouldn't be that hard for Lucic.I bet he got lots of texts from lots of players regarding the Cooke KO.
    Posted by dezaruchi


    Semantic, Dez.  Just go with, "Oh, I didn't know that."
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: larry brooks article

    In Response to Re: larry brooks article:
    In Response to Re: larry brooks article : Semantic, Dez.  Just go with, "Oh, I didn't know that."
    Posted by Not-A-Shot

    I did know that and don't think it's going out of one's way to send a text.How about this;I'll start using that term the minute you do(although I have before-have you?).
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: larry brooks article

    In Response to Re: larry brooks article:
    In Response to Re: larry brooks article : I did know that and don't think it's going out of one's way to send a text.How about this;I'll start using that term the minute you do(although I have before-have you?).
    Posted by dezaruchi


    I freely admit mistakes.  Find a Marchand thread fo proof.

    How did Lucic get Kane's phone number?  Isn't that going out of one's way?


     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from screw-cindy-and-ovie. Show screw-cindy-and-ovie's posts

    Re: larry brooks article

    In Response to Re: larry brooks article:
    In Response to Re: larry brooks article : I freely admit mistakes.  Find a Marchand thread fo proof. How did Lucic get Kane's phone number?  Isn't that going out of one's way?
    Posted by Not-A-Shot

    Former Vancouver giant teammates?
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: larry brooks article

    In Response to Re: larry brooks article:
    In Response to Re: larry brooks article : Former Vancouver giant teammates?
    Posted by screw-cindy-and-ovie


    Yeah, those eight games Kane played gave them plenty of time to become friends and exchange phone numbers which they kept for many years after.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: larry brooks article

    In Response to Re: larry brooks article:
    In Response to Re: larry brooks article : Yeah, those eight games Kane played gave them plenty of time to become friends and exchange phone numbers which they kept for many years after.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot

    We all know it's a little harder for you to make friends.....
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: larry brooks article

    I'm suprised he didn't blame John Torterella..Every article he throws a jab at him
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: larry brooks article

    In Response to Re: larry brooks article:
    In Response to Re: larry brooks article : I freely admit mistakes.  Find a Marchand thread fo proof. How did Lucic get Kane's phone number?  Isn't that going out of one's way?
    Posted by Not-A-Shot

    You weren't asking me to admit a mistake.You said I should just say "I didn't know"when I actually did. A text is,by no means,going out of ones' way.Thanks for adding to the debate though.........or trying to anyway.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: larry brooks article

    In Response to Re: larry brooks article:
    In Response to Re: larry brooks article : I freely admit mistakes.  Find a Marchand thread fo proof. How did Lucic get Kane's phone number?  Isn't that going out of one's way?
    Posted by Not-A-Shot

    I don't need to find any Marchand threads to know you said he was a 4th liner at best.I also know you happily admitted you were glad to be mistaken.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: larry brooks article

    I agree with his premise completely. I am not satisfied with Francie Boillon's cheap shot elbow to Aaron Ward 3 years ago out of the penalty box.

    And the Matt Cooke incident.  I am not satisfied with the limp beating Cooke took from Thornton.

    I don't think it's good enough.

    And the Engelland hit wasn't clean either.  He drove Savard's head into the glass. It's the same hit Bergeron took from Jones in October  of 2007 except it was from the blind side.

    There is absolutely no doubt Chiarelli and Julien are soft and they don't turn Thornton, Lucic, Stuart, etc, loose to blast these little punks when necessary.

    Absolutely.

    Matt Cooke would have been in a coma if this was 1975, 1985 or even 1995.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: larry brooks article

    In Response to Re: larry brooks article:
    In Response to Re: larry brooks article : Spot on Cowboys9 . Its not a Bruins issue , it is a league wide issue where players could give 2 shittz what happens if they hit a guy in the head because they know there will be no retaliation from anybody. And that goes for all teams.Respect for each other on the ice is long gone. Used to be players didn't even have to wear helmets.  
    Posted by 50belowzero


    I agree with this, too. This is a Bettman issue with Colin Campbell swooping in trying to make the game more PC to attract more women/girls and PC fans who are new to the game.

    I partially blame Bettman, who has clearly ruined the NHL.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: larry brooks article

    In Response to Re: larry brooks article:
    And the Engelland hit wasn't clean either.  He drove Savard's head into the glass. It's the same hit Bergeron took from Jones in October  of 2007 except it was from the blind side.
    Posted by BBReigns


    One hit was from behind, the other was from the side.  That makes them DIFFERENT.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share