LTS

It's never a random Thursday if you do it right.

Whatever plan they have would include gamecenter, I am sure they have no choice. The bigger issue is having broadcast be streaming and/or local access only. Fans with DirecTV/Dish will want to see the game. People in the more rural areas will be without a way of viewing the games if it's streaming only. My parents live in Franklinville and have satellite internet. No way they stream a game. So any plan will have to include at least some kind of regional sports carriage or they hurt themselves. I don't know how DirecTV,Dish, etc. will take to having the games streaming for free. There's little incentive for them to carry the network but it'll be interesting to see how it plays out.

This is all I need.. http://www.tsn.ca/babcock-calls-out-leafs-veteran-forwards-1.369100 Not even the regular season and he's bent... I'll never cheer for the Leafs, Bruins, or Flyers.. just can't happen. I'll take pleasure in their misery.

Maybe they should just have the Count from Sesame Street or something...

If the Sabres own the broadcast rights to their games then I think the most obvious answer is that they will have a streaming package to view those games online. Perhaps they will partner with Netflix? They could opt for a more open option like Youtube as well. http://www.lightreading.com/video/ott/are-sports-next-for-netflix/a/d-id/718421 Their camera work can easily be fed to GameCenter and other NHL properties.. no problem.

That's a great article His insight into his toe drag was amazing. Here's what I know.. the players can only wear numbers between 1 and 36. The odd #'s are red, the even #'s are black, and Goalie wears #0 and has a green number. After that.. all bets are off..

That said.. pairing Eichel with leadership and experience of Gionta and Moulson wouldn't be the worst thing either. It might be temporary but it's probably worth it.

See, this statement is where you get yourself in trouble. IF you want to say that the odds of that scenario are marginally higher now given recent events you might be okay. However, there I think it's extremely irresponsible and inaccurate to portray this as the mother and daughter are squeezing kane for money and certainly not more and more likely. There's just no solid evidence to suggest that. It is not proven to be untrue or true any more than any other possibilities. Then you jump to prison. Sigh. And you are back to using "IF" again.. which normally would be fine but you do interject your "more and more likely" which then adds your presumed judgment to the statement.

I see what you are saying. I think my assumption also included that the the original bag would not have been discarded, but you are correct. If the protocol does not require that the original bag be kept as part of the evidence chain then it could be true. (That's what you were pointing out right?) I'm not there yet either (although I did hypothesize about that before). Still, I am kind of at the same point as sizzle. It seems plausible that the Mother found some way to try and discredit the initial reports about DNA by possibly suggesting that rape kit was tampered with. This is going to get a bit stranger before it becomes clear. The lawyers involved have the ability to act quickly whereas the DA has to be a bit more cautious. So, I am sure they will find something out. I love the accuser's lawyer quitting though. I mean, he pretty much said the mother cannot be trusted on the story of how she obtained the bag.

Despite the pathetic bickering going back and forth... which made it take far too long to get through this. Let's tackle the announcements and what they COULD mean. First, the existence of this evidence bag. If it is indeed authenticated as the lawyer claims then the assumption is that the kit was removed from the bag at some point. This leads us to the statement that all evidence is in custody and accounted for. Using that information we can only assume that the evidence in custody is not the initial rape kit. Now.. let's play detective. The evidence bag is dropped at the mother's door by someone who knows the evidence was tampered with. How do they know? Let's assume they are present when the kit is performed and they see something that's out of the ordinary. They find this bag but they don't want to inject themselves into this circus. They hope they are wrong, that someone screwed up the bag and discarded it and used a new one. So, I'll hold onto this bag, because you never know. The information about no DNA present gets let out and this person believes that they have the original bag. Drop it off anonymously at the door and see what happens. Now, onto how this happens in the first place. It's a great question. One has to assume that the original rape kit would show up evidence of the victim's DNA. So in order to substitute a separate rape kit that would contain the victim's DNA you would have to perform two at that moment and somehow perform one of them such that it would be assured to NOT show any DNA from Kane. I won't get into who would do this because people do stupid things all the time for stupid reasons (see putting saws in raw meat to break prisoners out of prison). I don't have information on what protocols used in the room at the time. Clearly there is going to be more than 1 person present. I assume someone from law enforcement should oversee the process but perhaps that is not required. Either way there has to be someone present at the time who can perform a rape kit that will show DNA evidence of the victim but NOT of Patrick Kane. This implies that someone is working for a favorable outcome for Kane (not working FOR Kane necessarily). Now, if the kit that is still in custody is the original. Then you have a situation where perhaps someone willfully created a second evidence bag. Why? Well, if you want to get crazy on ideas. Let's assume the victim knows a rape kit will be performed but not show anything (yes, this implies that the rape charge was premeditated). Then, she is working with someone at the hospital to create a situation where it might appear someone is tampering with evidence in FAVOR of Patrick Kane. If the rape kit that shows no DNA evidence is considered to be solid truth then it would hurt her chances of a conviction. However, if someone Kane can be perceived to have tampered with evidence (even if it can't be proven) then it changes things. Perhaps not criminally, but most probably in a civil lawsuit. Yep.. we're way out there now. So, why does Kane's attorney speak? Well, in either instance he wants to strongly portray that all evidence is still accounted for. He wants to underscore the story that shows his client is not guilty and that there is no evidence to indicate he had sex with the victim. If he knows evidence has been tampered with its in his interest to try and dissuade people from thinking it actually happened. If it is the opposite line of thinking then it is the case that he is attempting to discredit the finding of this bag as having meaning and thus keeping the sanctity of the original kit intact. This also helps his client. In the end, this shouldn't be too hard to track down. Most hospital employees are going to break down in the face of evidence against them and pressure. Law enforcement officials would be a tougher nut to crack but somewhere along the line some bit of handwriting or some procedural misconduct will likely be found. All I know is.. this is going to be one hell of a story no matter how it plays out.

I'm not a Seinfeldian.. but somehow I feel like this would be a Seinfeld thing. Is it?

Certainly I can expect that. I guess a better question would be.. why would the DA be inclined to provide anything of substance to those lawyers? However I think we can see now that this has to do specifically with the family and therefore it makes more sense their lawyer is commenting. I expect this to quickly make its way to L&O:SVU.

back and to the left back and to the left back and to the left You missed a few. just saying..

So how much involvement would the accuser's lawyer have in the matter of a criminal investigation? Why would her lawyer even be involved? Shouldn't it be the DA's office that would address this? Is there a civil suit that I am not yet aware of?

There is a much better version of Swords of a Thousand Men by a band called Skyclad. I posted that version in the original goal horn song thread. If they want to use that song they should really consider that version in my opinion. I have to give them credit of at least mocking up the goal horn to song for each candidate.

Exactly. He's already earned it. Everyone knows it including his teammates but there's a ton of respect for him not accepting it until the right time.

One of the things I noticed on the Eichel to Moulson goal was the play Girgensons makes on zone entry. He takes the hit but puts the puck out into play for Eichel to continue. Love players like that.

Not even close. You guess wrong. YAY! Real thinking applied! Everyone pay attention here. I can't predict how anyone is going to act, but it's their choice to not remain impartial. Thing is.. they'd still be wrong to do so. They might ultimately turn out to be right, but that doesn't prove their position now. He's accused of a crime. He's not charged with anything.

I would pay to see more of that.

Maybe was always a possibility. And any implication at this point that he did not would be just as irresponsible as any that he did. As for Kane at camp, he's not charged with anything. You speak of holding him out of camp because of the distraction the MEDIA might cause by having him there. That can be easily controlled. There is no way Kane should not be allowed at camp. The only thing, at this point, that Kane is guilty of is poor decision making on getting himself into this situation and the impacts it has on his teammates and family. However, plenty of people make those kinds of mistakes all day long.

Yea.. I expected him to pronounce it that way. Perhaps he was having fun? Perhaps he says it that way and others say it like pesser. Either way.. it was funny to hear.

It's a great interview... but my greatest take away on that interview is Pysyk's nickname... Pysser. aka PIsser.

http://www.tsn.ca/isles-cut-prospect-ho-sang-after-showing-up-late-1.362669 And that will be all for Mr. Ho-Sang. Kid is his own worst enemy.

My ability to skate in the NHL has nothing to do with any player being able to play in the NHL. Many of us are capable of playing the game of relativity. In that, relative to other NHL players, a certain player may be judged for his ability to play the game. If you think about it even more, most coaches were not outstanding NHL players and some may never have played but they get to decide which players are NHL capable as well.

The perfect scenario? The Sabres thump Toronto during the season. The Sabres just miss the playoffs and win a lottery spot while Toronto drops to picking 4th or lower. Perhaps Subban at some point but I'm not sure he's controlling his temper enough yet.