GAME DAY:New York Rangers @ Ottawa Senators - 7:30pm ET - THU. Dec. 9, 2010

Catch phrase #3
"We're a really fragile team right now, it's not ______________'s fault he can't score. Coach __________ shouldn't take the fall for this.

Number Twenty Nine wrote:"No need to panic we're only _____ games into the season. Wait until we get to game number _____ and then we'll re-evaluate"

^
Senator fan catch phrase#1. As long as I've been coming to online Sens boards, the above has been a staple. Keep it ready for next season.

Done and done!

LOL @ #29 - that is pretty spot on.

Stay thirsty my friend.

Still the best one is:

It's still early, there's time to come together.

SpezDispenser wrote:Still the best one is:

It's still early, there's time to come together.

I blame your avatar and sig.

So, have you got your passport for Tank Nation?

SpezDispenser wrote:

stempniaksen wrote:Bob McKenzie has turned down tons of scouting jobs over the years, so I'm thinking he's comfortable with what he's doing.

P.S What's the infatuation with hiring media people to run the franchise? How about we get a respected hockey guy, I feel like that could be a half decent idea too...

In McKenzie's case, name me one other guy who doesn't have a GM job - or has retired - so no Scotty Bowman - that knows more about the game, from players to prospects?

Then, tell me where McGuire would rank as well.

These guys know what they're talking about IMO, McKenzie would be a coup.

I could name 10 guys I'd rather have who aren't NHL GM's.

Just because they aren't on your tv every night doesn't mean there aren't people out there who can build a team.

This isn't a slight against McKenzie or McGuire, but there is a reason these guys have zero (or limited) GM'ing experience.

I just disagree with names like McGuire, McKenzie and Messier when there is still "proven" guys out there.

stempniaksen wrote:
I could name 10 guys I'd rather have who aren't NHL GM's.

Just because they aren't on your tv every night doesn't mean there aren't people out there who can build a team.

This isn't a slight against McKenzie or McGuire, but there is a reason these guys have zero (or limited) GM'ing experience.

I just disagree with names like McGuire, McKenzie and Messier when there is still "proven" guys out there.

All I'm saying is that these are the guys with their fingers on the pulse.

I made a thread somewhere about Ottawa's next GM and posted some names. What are the names you're interested in?

SpezDispenser wrote:

stempniaksen wrote:
I could name 10 guys I'd rather have who aren't NHL GM's.

Just because they aren't on your tv every night doesn't mean there aren't people out there who can build a team.

This isn't a slight against McKenzie or McGuire, but there is a reason these guys have zero (or limited) GM'ing experience.

I just disagree with names like McGuire, McKenzie and Messier when there is still "proven" guys out there.

All I'm saying is that these are the guys with their fingers on the pulse.

I made a thread somewhere about Ottawa's next GM and posted some names. What are the names you're interested in?

I posted in that thread too, but Fenton, Nill, Loiselle, Nonis, Schoenfeld all stick out. Although if I did a little digging I could find a handful of others, there are some really brilliant asst GM's in this league.

What is a "brilliant asst GM"? How do you define that? How do you measure it? If he is the assistant, how do you know which are his decisions?

wprager wrote:What is a "brilliant asst GM"? How do you define that? How do you measure it? If he is the assistant, how do you know which are his decisions?

You're right...guy's I perceive as being brilliant and have great credentials.

It's an opinion and I should have formulated it that way.

stempniaksen wrote:

wprager wrote:What is a "brilliant asst GM"? How do you define that? How do you measure it? If he is the assistant, how do you know which are his decisions?

You're right...guy's I perceive as being brilliant and have great credentials.

It's an opinion and I should have formulated it that way.

I really wasn't trying to be a Richard, btw.

wprager wrote:

stempniaksen wrote:

wprager wrote:What is a "brilliant asst GM"? How do you define that? How do you measure it? If he is the assistant, how do you know which are his decisions?

You're right...guy's I perceive as being brilliant and have great credentials.

It's an opinion and I should have formulated it that way.

I really wasn't trying to be a Richard, btw.

A Richard? Haha, what an awesome filter. Who's responsible for that one?

stempniaksen wrote:

wprager wrote:

stempniaksen wrote:

wprager wrote:What is a "brilliant asst GM"? How do you define that? How do you measure it? If he is the assistant, how do you know which are his decisions?

You're right...guy's I perceive as being brilliant and have great credentials.

It's an opinion and I should have formulated it that way.

I really wasn't trying to be a Richard, btw.

A Richard? Haha, what an awesome filter. Who's responsible for that one?

That wasn't an auto-filter. I actually typed it like that

I vote that's the new filter. It fills me with joy and laughter when I read it.

Done! Try it out.

Richard

EDIT:

EDIT2: I'm glad I finally contributed positively to the boards.

Richard Richard Richard!

Hey what happens if I want to discuss Richard van dyke? Or Brett favre's Richard-tatorship with female personnel? No one will understand my reference

I can't wait for Richard Clark's Rockin' Eve.

C'mon!