Brush with Greatness

There was a movie?! That's the first I've heard of it! Can someone summarize what basically happened, please? Degrassi: School's Out Anyways, school ends. Caitlyn and Joey are seeing each other but Caitlyn is really busy at work so they don't get to see much of each other and Caitlyn doesn't put out. Joey decides to fuck Tessa Campinelli on the side. Joey finally fucks Caitlyn too and I even think Joey and Caitlyn maybe get engaged (maybe not). Snake's life is shit because he can't get laid and is not getting any chicks at all and Joey and Wheels constantly harp on him about it. Wheels is turning into this big alcoholic who only cares about fixing up his car. "Wheel's, that's like your third beer today!" None of the other characters really fucking matter. Anyways, summer ends with a huge party at Lucy's cabin. Snake lets it slip about Joey fucking too chicks and Caitlyn heres so Joey gets fucked over at the party and Snake and Joey are all pissy at each other and maybe they even tussle. Snake, however, ends up saving the lives of those two chicks who never got any lines. Wheels, meanwhile, drinks and drives with Lucy in the car. Wheels crashes and kills some family and I think Lucy gets pretty fucked up but doesn't die. And that's pretty much it. I think Simon and Alexa get married. The central focus of course is the Zit Remedy trio.

Just curios if anyone uses any of the sites out there online to gamble on sports and if so, what are the best sites?

In regards to a possible Silva v. Couture fight, it's funny because every time I see Couture fight I think to myself "Oh, he'll take Silva." But then I turn around and watch Wanderlei fight and go "No, he'll take Couture." I honestly have no clue who would win. Couture is such a smart and disciplined fighter and has dominated everyone since dropping down to LH and I potentially favour him, but I just can't bring myself to seeing Wanderlei lose. He's so explosive. Fuck do I want to see that fight. As for the card, the last match really made up for the dissapointment of the crappy stoppages earlier. What the fuck was with those shoulder injuries? Lot of what I'll call weak finishes, not weak in the sense that they were soft, but just anti-climatic/less exciting weak. Cut/ref stoppages just aren't the same as the classic KO. And the two shoulder injuries sucked hard. At first when they said Jackson was cut and they checked him, I was worried that we might have another early stoppage. However, that killer knockout of Jackson made the card. Did you see on the one camera angle how the blood just gushed out to the mat after he fell through the ropes? Give me Silva-Couture already. I can't wait anymore!

Has anyone checked out the betting line on Herring and Yokoi? Very interesting.

Has anyone seen KOTC 3 "Knockout Nightmare" or KOTC 4 "Gladiators"? There have them as Walmart in the cheap bin for 5 bucks Canadian (both on the same disc). I'm just wondering if they are all throwaway matches or if there is some decent stuff on them.

Personally I hate God Bless America being played during the stretch. Hell, they took a fun part of the game and turned around into this serious reflection of the world stage. What the hell is the point of the Star Spangled Banner then?

That's surprising considering that your Yankees had won three straight championships and looked primed for a fourth throughout the 2001 season. Unfortunately, they made the switch and have failed in every season since. Like I pondered in the ALCS thread, could there be a curse on the Yankees for altering the great "Take Me Out to the Ballgame" tradition?

So if the first 13 games of the week are any indication, count on Cinncinatti dismantling Denver, led by their run defence holding Droughns and company to under 50 yards.

Two "In Living Color" alumnus at that.

Anyone else realize that since converting from "Take me out to the ballgame" to "God Bless America" that the Yankees have failed to win a World Series? That's four straight years. Prior to that change in 2001 they had 3 straight championships and 4 in 5 seasons. It looks like there is a new curse, the "God Bless America" curse.

Were they votes or nominations? CBC's website makes it about as clear as mud. Nominations/votes, whatever. Only 140,000 or so people "nominated" Great Canadians. The top 100 list (the 100 is available at CBC's website) is based on the order of number of "nominations" or votes that someone received. The top ten nominees however, are somewhat reshuffled so to speak, and voting starts for them now.

I'm not so sure Treble. I mean, look at last season's NHL playoffs. I was cheering heavily for Calgary and did not want to see Tampa win. However, even though I'm dissapointed in the result (and hate the fact that Tampa won) I would much rather have had that series we got than one in which Calgary would have swept Tampa in four ugly games, as sweet as it would have been to have the Cup back in Canada, and a small market team at that. Sure, the record books fifty years from now will say Tampa Bay Lightning Stanley Cup champs, but personally I will always remember what a faboulous series it was and how much I enjoyed it, despite being hurt by the result. Now admittedly, I'm not a Flame-lifer. However, for Yankee fans especially, I don't know how they can bitch when they know the team is going to be back there year after year. That would make it so easy just to be excited by good baseball. Where the hell is the fun in beating everyone badly every year? It's a little different for lifelong Sox fans who have gone through numerous years of suffering.

There is seriously something wrong with most of you Yankee fans. I'll be honest, I hate the Yankees (it's a controlled hate though, it's not like I wish death upon any of them). I hate the big money, big market mentality of them. Spend a lot of money to win, if you don't win, spend some more. To me that is bad for sport. As much as some fans love the playoffs to watch "their team" hopefully win, I look forward to the playoffs to watch the Yanks hopefully lose. I wouldn't call myself a Red Sox fan per se, but because nothing would be sweeter than seeing the Yanks lose to the Sox (and because I feel sorry for them), I am cheering for them heavily in this series. Even more importantly than this though, is that I am a baseball fan (at least playoff baseball). Now, how anyone who calls themselves a baseball fan can be bitching after the past three games is beyond me. These past three games have been incredible. At first I was rooting for Boston to beat the Yanks, then I was merely rooting for them to make a series out of it. After those first three games Boston could have rolled over and died in game four. And yeah I would have been pissed, not because the Sox lost or because the Yanks won, but because of how shitty the series would have been considering how excited I was coming in. Is all you care about winning or do the games actually matter? Is your happiness so dependent upon the Yankee's winning or losing that you would sacrifice the incredible games that we have just witnessed just to have some peace of mind? If you would rather have had the Yankees sweep than the series go the way it has gone, then don't call yourself a baseball fan and quit watching while you are at it. Now, you might be thinking I only feel this way because it has been the Sox coming back on the Yankees. However, if the situation was reversed and it was the Yanks crawling back from down 3-0 to the Sox to tie the series in such an incredible manner I would be thinking the exact same thing. I wouldn't be wishing death (or AIDS) upon the players but rather cheering for them to raise their game to the next level, as the other team has so obviously done. As much as I hate the Yanks and love to see them lose, no way in hell did I want to see this series go less than seven (okay, maybe a Sox win in six wouldn't have been that bad) However, no matter the final outcome, the Sox have turned this into another series that adds to the aura of this rivalry and a series that will be remembered forever. Will I be watching tomorrow night? Hell yeah. Do I want the Sox to win 15-0? Well, I'd take it, but to me nothing would be better than an extra inning win? Sure, it will drive me nuts in the process, but that is the beauty of sport. And seriously, Yankee fans, if you win (and that's a big if) what feeling would be better than knowing how hard the Sox fought back, only to be denied again? I'll probably go through 1000 different emotion changes tomorrow night (and I hope to because that means it will be one hell of a tight game) and I'll probably be really pissed if the Yanks snub the Sox again. No matter the final result though, I'm just thankful for the incredible series these two have produced again. And hell Yankee fans, there is always next year. Get your boys playing some winter ball, buy some free agents and reload to extract some revenge because I think we both know who is winning tomorrow night.

Alright, problem is, my firefox tab on the taskbar dissapeared when I minimized it. There was a very important email on this tab and now I can't access it. So that tab is obviously still running in the background. However, by alt-ctrl-del doesn't work (nothing happens) so I can't access the task manager that way. Anyway to access the task manager to to get "draw out" hidden tabs? All suggestions appreciated and thanks in advance.

Too many correct calls?

Though a big fan of the subject content and really interested going in, I walked away from both of them with a "meh." One of the WORST parts of both has to be the music (or lack thereof). No Nirvana songs and no Tupac songs and there is not even a good original soundtrack or anything. Both of them are really slow paced and you sometimes wonder "where is he going with this" and sometimes he ends up going nowhere. There are some interesting tidbits in each, but as far as documentaries go, there are way better. Hell, there are even better documentaries related to Tupac including "Welcome to Death Row" and "Tupac Resurrection".

You're trying to tell me that Hal Anderson isn't the 34th greatest Canadian in history? He carries the Power 97 radio morning show in Winnipeg. Of course, since there were only like 140,000 total votes, if Hal had thought of this early and got his campaign going early, he would've had a legit shot at winning it.

I'm more suprised that McCarver was able to put together a thought without somehow tying it into how great Derek Jeter is.

New England is coming down off the record and Seattle is out to prove something after falling apart against the Rams. New England will fall first, then beat the Jets. Philly will be the last undefeated team.

Well, those three sure came in a hurry (assuming Ken Caminiti counts) - as in deaths come in threes. Dangerfield, Caminitti, and Reeves. At least we're not going who's next now.

You can't really measure it that way (especially with Orr) because it doesn't take into account the deterioration of stats as the players get older. As for the injuries argument, you could make the same thing with Gretzky and his back (originally fuelled by the '91 Canada Cup Suter cheap shot). It's a tough call on who is the best. Orr was easily the most complete of all three and in my opinion should get the nod, but it's such a hard call.

Wow, after looking at those pictures, Bonds could have easily made those gains from year to year with legal supplements such as Protein, Glutamine and Creatine among others. On top of that I'm sure he doesn't skimp on paying a personal trainer/sports nutrionist, so he's got the best in those departments as well. No offence to the guys (here and in the media) that constantly rip on Bonds, but it is blatantly obvious that you/they know very little about developing muscle mass. Don't know if anyone here follows MMA, but Randy Couture is older than Bonds and is considered one of (if not the best) light heavyweight in the world. This is a guy who was once considered washed up as a heavyweight a few years ago but has trimmed down and is in phenomenal shape (at the age of 40). And I can say with 99.9% certainty that Couture is clean, so why can't Bond's be the baseball equivalent?

Though they share a lot of the same idea's, I think Brian Burke's proposal is far superior and much more thought out. I don't know, maybe this ESPN guy just decided to lift a few or Burke's ideas that he liked. As it is, Burke's proposal has been the best that I have seen and I would like to see it taken to both the players and management. Don't forget that Burke at one time was part of the NHL head office. A WORKING SOLUTION 1. Phase in agreement over two years Burke argues the CBA, whatever form it takes, should not go into effect immediately. "I argued vehemently against transitional rules, but now I'm convinced we're going to need them, so you're going to need to phase-in [a new CBA] over two years." 2. Commit to a 12-year contract While Burke concedes that a 12-year contract is a long deal, he believes his system will work if the players are guaranteed their percentage of the designated hockey revenue, in combination with an "escrow portion of that and a portion of what the league has for revenue purposes." [see point #3 below] 3. Escrow: * Seven per cent of player payroll * Ten per cent of designated hockey revenue (DHR) * Arena construction fund "The arena construction fund is something that they've done in the NFL with stadiums and I think the players will be in a lot better shape if we didn't have debt service on all our buildings." 4. Agree to share revenues of $200 million with $75 million coming from playoff pool "I'm proposing revenue sharing be considered at $200 million, which is more than any of the other proposals I've seen," said Burke. "Only $75 million of that would be from the playoff pool. I think that should come from some of the wealthier teams." 5. Avoid luxury tax by establishing a payroll threshold at $38 million and payroll minimum of $33 million "I don't like the term 'luxury tax'; players aren't a luxury," said Burke. "I'm not coming off the idea of a salary cap; I think it's the best system in pro sports. I think it has worked miracles in the National Football League. But if you have to go to something else, this might work." Burke's numbers of a $38 million payroll threshold and a $33 million minimum are not set in stone. "They're [flexible] numbers," explained Burke. "You would have to figure out what the hockey revenues are and [adjust] the players' percentage to come up with that." 6. Set overage fees at: * 1st million = $0.50 on the dollar * 2nd million = $1 per dollar * 3rd million = $2 per dollar * 4th million = $3 per dollar * 5th million or more = $5 per dollar Burke characterized the union's luxury tax proposal akin to "changing a side-view mirror on a bus that's going off a cliff." "It will have absolutely no impact on spending. This is a realistic, ramped up tax that should have an effect on what clubs spend." 7. Reward good business behaviour by charging fees to repeat offenders Under Burke's proposal, teams that exceed the payroll threshold year after year would be charged a fee, with that money distributed to teams that stay within the threshold. "If a team repeatedly is up there and is inflationary, in my mind, the tax rate should change. You should reward good behaviour on the business front." 8. Guarantee players 55 per cent of DHR Under Burke's plan, 55 per cent of the DHR would include "the income streams that are normally allocated to players in systems like this in the NBA and NFL." 9. Build trust with joint audit controls: * 1st offence = $1 million fine * 2nd offence = $5 million fine Burke argues the league and union need to agree on a joint audit system similar to the NFL's in order to build trust between the two sides. Under Burke's plan, any team that tries to hide money would be slapped with a million-dollar fine, while a second offence would see the fine rise to $5 million. 10. Establish four-year entry-level system with a maximum $250,000 in rookie bonuses Burke helped negotiate the entry-level system part of the CBA ten years ago, but he feels that it is "ridiculous in terms of the bonuses that rookies can earn." "That's money that should go to veteran players," argued Burke. "Tack a year on [the entry-level system] and cap what they can make in rookie bonuses." 11. Allow unrestricted free agency at age 29 Burke feels that unrestricted free agency should drop from 31 to 29 years of age. "I'm sure that people will say that's not enough of a move, but I think unrestricted player movement has led to a loss of confusion of identity with players in the NFL and in Major League Baseball." 12. Amend qualifying offers to restricted free agents: * The team with the rights to a player only has to match 75 per cent of the offer from another team to players over 26 years old * 50 per cent for players 26 years old and under Under the current CBA, the qualifying rate for restricted free agents is 100 per cent, depending on the player's salary. Burke thinks this is a "highly inflationary practice." Under his plan, players over 26-years-old would get qualified at 75 per cent, while players under 26 would get qualified at 50 per cent. "This means that once a player gets to a certain level and stops performing, he doesn't stay there forever and the team doesn't lose the rights to him." 13. Reduce regular-season games to 70 from 82 "I believe we play too many games. I think we should play 70 regular-season games and I think the product would be better, injuries would drop and I think our fans would be rewarded for that." 14. Revise salary arbitration by: * Adopting baseball's hi/low system * Allowing clubs to bring a player to arbitration * Permitting a team or player to file only once every 3 years Burke argued that salary arbitration has to be amended if it stays in the new CBA. He believes salary arbitration has to adopt Major League Baseball's model where the arbitrator picks either the player or owner proposal, and not decide on a dollar figure somewhere in between. Burke also believes that clubs should be able to bring a player into arbitration and that teams and players should only be allowed to file once every three years. "Guys that file every year [make it a] highly inflationary process," states Burke. 15. Set a drop-dead date for player signings Burke wants to adopt the NFL model where players that aren't signed by the start of the season are out for the year.

Now, it's time for a history lesson (because someone sorely needs one) Each teams goalies in 44-45 Detroit: Harry Lumley -who turned out to be not bad (not the quality of the guys you mentioned though). However, he was an 18 year old rookie at the time. Toronto: Frank McCool - played a total of 2 NHL seasons. Another rookie goalie. Boston: Harvey Bennett/Paul Bibault - Bennett was (surpise) a 19 year old rookie whose (you guessed it) only NHL season was 44-45. Bibault, an eventual journeyman, was a goalie in the Canadian's system loaned to Boston for the 44-45 season to replace Frank Brimsek. Career record 81-107-25. Chicago: Mike Karakas - possibly the best of the bunch? Had a few good years in Chicago in the late 30's before being demoted to the minors. Floated around the minors for 5 years before being recalled in '44. Career record 114-169-53. Rangers: Ken McAuley - McAuley was in his second year of his two year career. His career 17-64-15 record in two seasons probably had something to do with him never playing a third. There you have it. Two journeyman and a bunch of rookies (with only one ever establishing a career after veterans returned). Montreal had by far the best (and only decent) goaltender in Bill Durnan. As you can clearly see, the goaltending in '44-45 was amongst the worst the NHL has ever seen. The greats that preceeded this season such as Broda, Brimsek, Sugar Jim Henry and Chuck Rayner were off at the war and would not return until the following seasons. So, to correct you, NO Sawchuck, NO Hall, NO Broda, or NO Bower during Richard's record breaking 1944-45 season. To reitirate my point, it's no coincidence that Richard's 50 goal season occured this year. The goaltending was horrendous and alot of the skaters weren't much better. It's also no coincidence that he never matched that mark. I'll address the other stuff later but this was really bugging me.

Wow, just wow. Let's take off the Montreal fanboy glasses and take a serious look at things. a) Richard never won an Art Ross trophy. Don't know what else to add. I know it's not the be all end all, but for consideration as the best player ever, I would think at least one would help warrant cause. On top of this he only won the Hart trophy once. This is supposedly the greatest player ever and he was only league MVP one time. It's not like his playoff numbers are astounding either. He never led the playoffs in scoring and only once led them in goals. Granted he scored a lot of clutch goals but so have guys like Glenn Anderson and Brad Richards. b) I'll give credit to Richard for establishing the goal scoring mark of 50 goals in 50 games. My only real problem with that feat was that it was done in a war year when the player quality and goaltending quality was a lot shittier than the years after. It's no coincidence that he couldn't match that feat at any time after 44-45. c) Also, I'll give credit for establishing the 500 career goal mark, which he was the first to do. However, 7 players since have done it in a shorter time span. This also goes against your logic that Richard would have better numbers if he had played more games. Games to score 500 goals Richard - 863 Bobby Hull - 861 Kurri - 833 Esposito - 803 Brett Hull - 693 Bossy - 647 Lemieux - 605 Gretzky - 575 d) Richard, in all likelihood and by general consensus, isn't even the best player of his generation, with that distinction falling upon Gordie Howe's massive shoulders. Howe was the recepient of 6 Harts and 6 Art Ross trophies. On top of this he was considered every bit of a complete player as Richard was. All in all, Richard was a great goal scorer and achieved some prolific feats. However, he was never really all that much more than a goal scorer. Richard probably falls around number 5 all time in the greatest player lists. He is likeable to guys like Bobby Hull and the vastly underrated Mike Bossy, but apart from being the player to set the bar for players to follow, he never achieved much more than the names I just mentioned. As for Gretzky and the supposed shittiness of the Campbell... In 82-83 the worst three teams in the league were in the Wales (Hartford, New Jersey, Pittsburgh), In 83-84, the worst two were (New Jersey, Pittsburgh), two of the worst three were in 84-85 (again NJ and PIT). On top of that, in 84-85, the Smythe housed three of the top five teams in the league (Edmonton, Winnipeg, Calgary, with Philly and Washington being the other two). As it was, those three years were three of Gretzky's top 5 scoring years. Your claims of conference weakness are far off, and if anyone really had the best opportunity to rewrite the record books, it was the players playing in the Patrick those years.