IlliniKrush

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Apr 18, 2011 -> 07:41 PM) I honestly think both would succeed. I don't like the Bears, so I would definitely watch the other team. I love the Bulls, but I would definitely check out the other team, especially if they have cheaper ticket prices. A 2nd team in Chicago for either sport can be successful. It really is just dependent on prices and where in Chicago they are located. I don't quite understand the first part of your post if you are from Chicago. If you live in Chicago, and you decide at some age that you like football, the Bears are your team. At least that's how it should work. Yet somehow you don't like that team, live here, then would jump onto a new team also representing Chicago? I don't get it. I mean, I am a die hard Hawks fan, and for all the s*** that happened when I was growing up with them, they were my team. I liked hockey and lived in Chicago. They are my NHL team, for better or for worse, that's just how it works. In baseball you have a decision to make. In the other sports, you don't.

QUOTE (SoxFan1 @ Apr 18, 2011 -> 03:50 PM) I agree with most of this, however, if you don't think Torres came in trying to knock Seabrook's head clean off and into the 8th row, you're kidding yourself. That's where I'd be drawing the line, personally. Malicious intent. I never said that. In fact, I think you missed the sentence where I said he never went for the puck. QUOTE (The Critic @ Apr 18, 2011 -> 03:51 PM) I agree with every word. My first Facebook post after the play was "that wasn't an elbow". I'll add that if someone in a Hawks jersey made that exact same hit on a Sedin, people would have been gushing about it and not one person would have called it a dirty hit. Not one. Correct, which is why I try to look at things in an unbiased fashion, the only worthwhile way to do things.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Apr 18, 2011 -> 12:35 PM) Mike Murphy is a train wreck. Plus, why would ESPN 1000 replace their best show in Waddle & Silvy? Mike Murphy = bad radio. I also have no idea how someone can like both him and B/B, blows the mind. I think they are only weekends anyway, I don't think Waddle/Silvy are going anywhere?

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Apr 18, 2011 -> 12:47 PM) Sounds like no suspension for Torres. Some kind of technicality because it was behind the net, not certain exactly why. Sounds like BS to me. I know I'm probably in the minority because the hit happened to a Hawk, but looking at this unbiasedly I don't think it warranted a suspension. Interference? It certainly was, as Seabrook never touched the puck. But it was not an elbow at all, he didn't leave his feet, it wasn't from behind/side, and I don't believe he was targeting his head. He never went for the puck, which is troublesome, but if Seabrook did touch the puck it would have been a hard, but legal, hit. There is also more latitude given behind the net on hits than in other areas (NHL words, not mine). Just because a play "looks bad" live doesn't make it a suspension. Let me add that Seabrook put himself in an awful position on the play and needs to take some responsibility to have his head up/have more awareness, especially behind the net. That contributed to the intensity of the hit.

The Bears don't need to have 20 dollar seats, so why would they? And pretty much every "joe fan" walking around this city is a Bears fan first, everything else second, so I don't think they are missing out on any part of the market. Hell, most fans around the country are just "tv fans" because millions upon millions watch and there are only 8 home games per home team anyway.

QUOTE (Controlled Chaos @ Apr 17, 2011 -> 05:17 PM) He's drunk and in trouble all the time? I know he's been wasted on occasion and he has been shown at a lot of bars partying, but with the exception of 1 incident, he's been fine. When I was 22, I took off Mon & Wed and that's it. Had a good time and was able to function fine the next day. Now not so much, but now I may go out once a month. Kane is fine. I'm sorry, but what roster were you on?

You guys are ridiculous for trying to excuse the actions of Kane and chalking it up to "being young." Kane is the exception, not the rule. The rest of the young NHL isn't drunk and in trouble all the time. Bet people said the same s*** about Theo Fleury.

There was no need for the fixing of that post.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Apr 16, 2011 -> 11:50 PM) First of all, I think it's dangerous to trust Humber for a whole season. Secondly, I actually had the same thought, but was thinking Peavy as the closer. He's got the stuff, and with his injury history it might help him to only pitch a few innings a week. But then again, I can't agree with paying a reliever (not named Rivera) over $15 million a year. I'm not saying you should/shouldn't make Peavy the closer, but if you are playing him 15 mil no matter what he does, you might as well do what's best for the team. Once the checks are signed, it doesn't matter what role a guy has or if he plays.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Apr 9, 2011 -> 06:16 PM) What the f*** is with these racist ass U of I lineup introductions? ???

In regards to salaries, there are easily 5 significant players on the Hawks that are a bigger problem in regards to the production/salary relationship than Kane.

Staring at the "catch me @ mlbfancave.com" for 6 innings today made me finally google it. Hadn't heard of it until now. This is epic. http://mlbfancave.mlb.com/fancave/?partnerId=FCSearch_goo

Let's not forget the Canucks rang the post twice on good scoring opportunities. We didn't lose because of bad luck.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Apr 14, 2011 -> 09:32 AM) No Sox, Bulls or Hawks today. I'm beyond lost on what to do with myself for the night. NHL Playoffs. Every night.

Yeah, I hear you, everything is distorted now. All the milestones for points and everything don't mean crap, as there are now 3 point games. You can't compare point totals for the length of a franchise anymore. I don't mind the point for the SOL, because if you lose a skills competition after 65 minutes you should get a point) but they need to make regulation wins worth more than an OT (or at least a shootout) win. Hawks do have a shot, it's just not the same Nucks/Hawks matchup as the past two seasons. In those matchups we were the favorite or even, in this one we are the clear dog, that's all. Let's just get this started and hopefully win one of the first two in Vancouver and go from there.

Compared to last year it was a down year for the conference. Last year everyone in finished with 100+ except one team. Steve while I certainly agree with you that anything can happen, 97 wouldn't have been a top 4 finish ever in the modern era. 97 points would have had them finish 8th, 6th, 5th, 8th, and 7th in those 5 seasons.

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Apr 12, 2011 -> 12:29 AM) Well I mean, we have a backup, and honestly Turco (our backup), would be starting for a lot of teams. So if you think about it, the Hawks have probably one of the best backups in the league, the problem is that the better goalie is the inexperienced rookie with no playoff games under his belt. You couldn't be more wrong. Please let me know which teams Turco would be starting for with his save percentage below .900 (40th), his GAA above 3 (39th) and his propensity for the soft goal. Turco was AWFUL this year. There's a reason Q didn't even give him ONE start past February. He was the #1 this year and slowly lost the job to a rookie because of his poor play. He would not start for many, if any, other teams.

Yeah, let's not forget the rocket hit right at Paul for the first out. Should have been tied then anyway.

His OBP sucks, and he can't catch the ball. Right now he is truly worthless.

Well, I take my hat off to the Wild. Also thanks to Dallas for pulling an even larger choke job yesterday. They were playing a Wild team with a ton of AHL regulars in their lineup and a backup goalie which they torched all year, and still couldn't get it done. Everyone remember to send a Christmas card to them in December. New season. And making the playoffs for this organization is a million times better than missing it the year after you win the cup. At least you have a chance. Canucks should win obviously. They are a much deeper team than the Hawks, and they didn't have to play like hell to even get in (see Crawford playing the past 4959 games, for example). This Canucks team is better than the past few years, and the Hawks are much different as well. On paper, Canucks in 5/6. It's a weird situation to be in, but the Hawks have nothing to lose. They lose - well they are supposed to, regardless of the "defending cup champs" crap which I don't believe in. Can't really be disappointed in a loss. No pressure. You win - well you make heads roll in Vancouver, which would be fun to watch. We'll see what happens.

Tampa wasn't rostering an AHL squad and won like 3 of their past 14 games. They were also in the playoffs.

They aren't even playing. Our fate rests in the hands of the Houston Aeros. Good luck with that. We f***ing blew it.

f***.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Apr 10, 2011 -> 09:33 AM) Kendalls on Friday's has a special where you pay 10 bucks from 6-9 for unlimited beer, wings and pizza, I don't care how old you are, you can't beat that deal. Kelsey's has the same thing

QUOTE (greg775 @ Apr 8, 2011 -> 08:37 PM) If the Hawks win this game are the Hawks in? Looking good at 4-1. No. Read above.