Jump to content

Dr K

Members
  • Posts

    30
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Dr K

  1. 2 hours ago, Archie Lee said:

    This is meaningless to me. Good coaches demand accountability. Some yell and scream and others do so quietly. I don’t need a coach who makes a scene, just one who gets the job done. 

    I agree with this. I don't like coaches who are shouters. I think too many fans equate being loud and punitive with being a good coach. Sort of the "spare the rod and spoil the child" theory of coaching. Bosses like this do not get the best out of their workers. 

    • Like (+1) 1
  2. 6 hours ago, ... said:

    comeuppance Add to list Share

    /kəˈməpəns/

    IPA guide

    Other forms: comeuppances

    Comeuppance describes a fate or punishment that's deserved, like when an arrogant trash-talking quarterback fumbles the ball on the last play and loses the game for his team.

    Comeuppance began as a term that meant "present oneself for judgment by a tribunal." That was in 1859. You can picture an accused person approaching a judge, or "coming up" to the front of a courtroom. Guilt, innocence — comeuppance can be either, and it can apply to things beyond the justice system. Nowadays you'll most likely hear this word describe something bad. If someone gets a deserved punishment, you'd say "He got his comeuppance."

     

    So UPL, after going through the trial of the Three-Headed Monster™ and the scoffing and scorn of the media and the fan base, has received his reward as being proclaimed the number 1.

    1859 was 165 years ago.

    I gave you an example of "comeuppance" used as a deserved punishment, not a reward, from a movie that is 83 years old, set in the 1870s, 150 years ago.

     

     

     

     

  3. 1 hour ago, ... said:

    I recognize if people use it these days, it has a negative connotation. But I think the etymology makes a lot of sense in context if you ignore that aforementioned connotation.

    Not "these days." "Comeuppance" has ALWAYS had a negative connotation. "A punishment or fate that someone deserves."

     

    But about the hockey, I agree with you. 

     


     

    • Agree 1
    • dislike 1
  4. 7 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

    Oh Well was when I discovered there was a whole other Fleetwood Mac I didn't know existed before the McVie and Nicks era.  Oddly enough, whenever heard Parts 1 and 2 together, I didn't realize for a long time that they were parts of the same song.

     

    A great song, one of many Peter Green wrote and played. Tragic how short his early career was. Here's another:

     

    • Like (+1) 2
  5. Granato's record of developing young players like Dahlin and Thompson, and seeing the potential in players like Greenway, suggests to me that dumping him would be a big mistake.  Some fans seem to discount what they've got, always longing for the brilliant coach they are just sure will never make a mistake, automatically assuming that they abilities of the coach they want to dump are inconsiderable and will somehow carry over to the imaginary supercoach they want to get. 

    • Like (+1) 1
  6. 34 minutes ago, Eleven said:

    Sorry--more on this theme even though the game is over--I'm thinking Kruger from Seinfeld.  Or maybe even Ralph Krueger.  Just kinda casually strolling out with a NYC-style dirty water dog in hand-to-mouth while a face-off is happening in one of the ends.

    No, I have not had any edibles.

    Kramer from Seinfeld. 

  7. What to do in goal for next season is a tough question. Pencil in Levi as the #1? Trade resources to get an experienced #1 from another team and put Levi in as #2? Keep UPL as the #2 to Levi, or trade him? Dump Comrie? There are rational reasons to take a number of different approaches. 

    I think whatever decision GA makes is going to leave him open to criticism. There will be a lot of people on either side who think he is making a big mistake. 

  8. 10 hours ago, Contempt said:

    Calling today a meaningful game is also misguided. This team has failed the pressure away at every opportunity.

    Furthermore, I think it far from clear that they are on their way to obvious success.

    Their defensive structure is hot garbage, there is no defensive help coming in the pipeline, goaltending is still a huge question l,and it's also a question of the administration thinks that the lack of team defense is even an issue. Run and gun isn't a recipe for success. It's just not.

     

    It's clear you have chosen the correct moniker for yourself.

    • Haha (+1) 1
  9. 2 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

    Well, here is the 'problem' or at least the nature of social media/message boards:

    There are some people who don't like Granato. There are some people that do like Granato.  After a winning streak, the ones who like Granato will make their voices heard. After a losing streak or a bad loss, those who don't like his as coach have their time to speak.  Its the nature of things.

    The same behavior happens on the Bills forum or talk radio.  When the team wins a game by passing the ball all over, people say its great they play like that. When they lose, people complain "they need to run more!"   The common complaing is that people will complain no matter what they do. That isnt exactly true. You aren't hearing people complain 'no matter what', what you are doing is hearing DIFFERENT people complaining based on the most recent events of the team.

    If/when the Sabres go on a 3-4 game winning streak, I highly doubt there will be a lot of complaining about Granato as coach. If/when they lose 3-4 in a row there will be calls that he isn't the guy.  Its not so much people changing their mind...it is just the same 'different people' capitilizing in the situation to make their point.

    Very well said. Thanks.

     

    • Agree 1
  10. 14 hours ago, Eleven said:

    Abel, Beth, Cathy, and Daniel are at an ice cream parlor with four counter seats, which they occupy.  One of them farted very loudly.  Based upon the following clues, can you tell who smelt it and who dealt it?

     

    1.  Beth was the first person to enter the ice cream parlor.

    2.  Daniel did not order the hot fudge sundae.  

    3.  The person who ordered the banana split is not the farter.

    4.  Abel sat somewhere to the right of Cathy.

    5.  The soda jerk refused to make a cherry sundae for the third person to enter the ice cream parlor.

    6.  The person who smelt it has a name which begins with a consonant, and did not order a peanut waffle.

    Q: Who shaves the barber?

    • Haha (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...