| Author |
 Topic  |
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
 Posted - 05/09/2013 : 20:39:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
That is very true Willus. In most cases, losers make excuses and winner take responsiblities. This is perception but it always seems to be someone elses fault if the Canucks don't play well. The refs, the other team cheating, etc.
That starts with their coach. Maybe I am a bit biased but I recall very few, if any, situations where he took responsibility for a loss. I never hear him say his team needs to be better. It's always a reason why they lose and it's never about anything they did.
You are biased. And it is only your perception - don't confuse what the press may speculate or write about, and what the coach or players actually say. To counter your point, I had to go back exactly...one game:
http://video.sharks.nhl.com/videocenter/console?id=245993&catid=-6
All I hear in the post-game press conference is:
- the team had to kill that penalty and did not
- the sharks were the better team and the canucks simply got beaten
- Canucks did well 5-on-5, but the SJ PP was better and VAN was not good enough killing
- VAN battled hard, SJ was the better team
- will need to move forward from this, look to next season
- Schneider was the MVP of the season, and should have started game 4
Nowhere did I hear anything like:
- the refs blew calls that cost us
- the team lost because of bad bounces
- SJ players cheated, causing penalties to be called
- VAN deserved better, but the refs hate us
Sounds like a lot of admitting that the Canucks didn't play well enough to win, and owning up to the loss. The press conference post-game 4 was eerily like most press conferences that AV gives. I cannot even think of a time when he has credited either a win or a loss to anything other than his team's play (or in this case, lack thereof). |
 |
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 05/09/2013 : 21:38:20
|
Willis (and Beans)....
Ridiculous. You gave a post with your opinion, mine is an opinion of your opinion. Now, lemme clarify. By "losers", i can't deny the Canucks lost. They lost this year, they lost last year, the year before, etc. I talk of the Stanley Cup of course. So, if that's what you're talking about, as "losers", i take it back. However, if you're implying "losers" in an insulting sort of way, ahem, the way it sounds like you are, then i take issue. "The core of the team" are losers eh? They all whine, cry, make excuses, etc huh? Sure, i won't deny some do and have in the past, but i'll also point out that it's not unusual at this time of year when things come under the microscope. You make it seem as though the Canucks aren't just the first to do this, but the only team!!!
FTR, Daniel Sedin "screamed at the ref" and later (following the game), apologized. Is this "crying"? Is this "whining"? Is this "complaining"? Or is this a frustrated guy, who's been called out in the past for having NO PHYSICALITY whatsoever to his game, who's upset and frustrated at what most would agree was an extremely borderline call to make in that situation? He showed emotion, something else he's been accused of in the past.
As far as Bieksa's comments, yeah he complained. Do i need to back over ever series over the past 5-10 years and show you examples of where this exact thing occurs by either players or management, cuz it happens VERY OFTEN. If you disagree, you're blind to it.
Here's the thing, the Canucks have gotten a reputation, somewhat deservedly so. Burrows and Kesler, a few years back, were two of the worst for embellishing and bending the rules. Both smartened up a year later, yet i'll admit, as did Kesler already personally, that Kesler relapsed and was guilty the last season or two of drifting back into the habit of embellishment. This reputation that the Canucks now have, leads to more calls against them, especially the borderline ones. Bob Mackenzie mentioned this today and referred to something Kerry Fraser admitted. A referee is a human being. The human element here causes refs to call more borderline calls against players they either dislike, or feel don't respect them and who have a reputation. Kerry Fraser openly admitted as much! Take your bias / hatred out of the equation and you'd prob see a lot more borderline calls against the Canucks than the Sharks. You need only look at box scores or have watched the games to notice the 24-10 margin in PP's. Tell me, do you thing Sedin's check gets called 100% of the time in that situation? How about Bieksa's "crosscheck" errr, love tap that drew the penalty that led to the tying goal? Again, take away your bias and tell me what you think of that call. Did he complain? YUP! Did you see the interview, cuz it sure as hell didn't appear as though he was "whining". He was stating, matter of factly, his opinion. You know, something many a greats have done in an attempt to subtly bring something to the attention of the refs so as to maybe get a payback call in the games following. If you know hockey as well as i think you guys do, you'd realize this sort of thing happens often in the playoffs, maybe even in more series than it doesn't happen!
Now, before you go calling me a conspiracy theorist, that's far from it. I don't think the league is out to get the Canucks, nor do i believe the refs are intentionally trying to screw them. I just agree with what Kerry Fraser said. THAT, is the number 1 reason i believe this team needs wholesale changes and it starts with AV, who i think has been a very good coach here. I just think they need a huge changeover and a fresh start sotospeak.
Getting back to the loser bit, how is it that "There are those players who lose when it counts their entire careers. It isn't just bad luck."? Where do you come up with such craziness??? If Ray Bourque hadn't gone to win a cup with the Avs in the twilight of his career, would he have been a loser? Are the Sharks, assuming they don't win this year, a bunch of LOSERS? They've been together as a core with high expectations and even worse results for a longer time than the Canucks. Is Joe Thornton a LOSER if he never wins a cup??? Are Pat Lafontaine, Ron Hextall, Mike Gartner, Adam Oates, Dale Hawerchuk and Marcel Dionne a bunch of losers. Last time i checked, they didn't "win when it mattered most" and you said it yourself, "It isn't just bad luck"!!!  |
|
|
|
leigh
Moderator
Canada
1755 Posts |
Posted - 05/09/2013 : 23:51:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest0815
I saw a guy with a luongo jersey on and it had luongo crossed out and schneider written below it and that was also crossed out and below it was luongo again lol! true that.
So Brilliant!!!!! |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2013 : 05:09:05
|
I'm biased but the Canuck fans are not? That's rich. Don't believe me? Here you go.
Headline, " Bieksa accuses Sharks of Embelishing"
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=669524
Bieksa does eventually say they need to be more disciplined but only after he says this:
"Five-on-five, we're the better team. Their power play's been hot. We've been giving them too many chances. There's guys on their team, two guys in particular, that are embellishing a lot of calls, making it tough on the officials."
I'm not saying this is the end all be all but it is an example of what the rest of us see. After game one, AV complained about the Sharks cheating on face offs. It's just another example of the Canucks using excuses. I their losses to Chicago it was bad riffing. In their loss to Boston, the bruins we also getting favourable calls. The world is against me Canucks right? What a joke.
And Alex, your literal take on these comments is laughable. I, nor Willis, did not name a single player on Vancouver as a loser. But, no different than Boston in the 80's, this Canucks team can't seem to find a way to win even though they should. Winning is a culture. Mark Messier won everywhere he went except for Vancouver. Gretzky only won in Edmonton.
Groups of players can be in a culture of losing even thought they are excellent hockey players. The Oilers today are in that boat. As are Vancouver, and historically the Sharks have been too. I think for different reasons than the Canucks but they are all organizations that should have better results than what they get.
I don't think you can name another team who has won 7 of 10 division titles and 2 President's trophy who lost in the first round three times and only made it out of the second round once.
Sorry guys, but you saying the Canucks are not losers is about as laughable as me trying to say the same thing about the Oilers. The Canucks should be better and they are not.
But don't forget, it am the only biased one here.
|
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2013 : 10:30:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
I'm biased but the Canuck fans are not? That's rich. Don't believe me? Here you go.
Headline, " Bieksa accuses Sharks of Embelishing"
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=669524
Bieksa does eventually say they need to be more disciplined but only after he says this:
"Five-on-five, we're the better team. Their power play's been hot. We've been giving them too many chances. There's guys on their team, two guys in particular, that are embellishing a lot of calls, making it tough on the officials."
Beans, where did i say anything about Canucks fans not being biased? I believe every fan is biased in some regard. Please feel free to explain to me how i implied that myself or any Canucks fans aren't biased. All i did was ask you to take away your bias for a minute and answer / comment on 2 things:
1. Take your bias / hatred out of the equation and you'd prob see a lot more borderline calls against the Canucks than the Sharks.
2. How about Bieksa's "crosscheck" errr, love tap that drew the penalty that led to the tying goal? Again, take away your bias and tell me what you think of that call.
Now remember, when answering this, assume this call (on Sedin) went against Jordan Eberle in the exact same situation. See what i was getting at now?
I don't recall ever saying, "Hey Beans, unlike us Canucks fans, you are totally biased", or anything even close.
Isn't implying that i said that crap one of those "strawman" things you and Slozo always throw out there?
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
And Alex, your literal take on these comments is laughable. I, nor Willis, did not name a single player on Vancouver as a loser. But, no different than Boston in the 80's, this Canucks team can't seem to find a way to win even though they should. Winning is a culture. Mark Messier won everywhere he went except for Vancouver. Gretzky only won in Edmonton.
Oh, so "technically", you're correct, but FYI, Willus stated "The Canucks core players are "losers". ".
Trust me, i know who the core of the Canucks is. I'm assuming Willis does as well. You too for what it's worth, though it wasn't your comment so it doesn't really pertain to you anyway.
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
I don't think you can name another team who has won 7 of 10 division titles and 2 President's trophy who lost in the first round three times and only made it out of the second round once.
Lol, this is so good! It is always pointed out, by you and many others, that the division titles the Canucks have won have a lot to do with the competition they play against within said division. Let's face it, it's not been a very difficult division to win. So, one one hand, their division titles are somewhat tainted (just picking a word here), but on the other, they're division champs and ought to have better results because of it. It all depends on what you're arguing is guess? 
Lemme clarify, i think they should have made the 2nd and 3 round a couple more times, absolutely. I'm just pointing out how you're using the division title thing to your advantage when it's convenient for you. 
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Sorry guys, but you saying the Canucks are not losers is about as laughable as me trying to say the same thing about the Oilers. The Canucks should be better and they are not.
Again, i'm not saying they didn't "lose". However, and i made this clear, i took issue with the term "losers" as being more of an insult than a technical term. And i take issue with the fact that because they haven't won the cup, they're simply losers for life? What about all those other guys i mentioned who never "won the big one when it mattered"??? (i could name many more as well if you want?) I missed the part where you commented on that part of my post. Oh, right, you picked and chose the parts you thought you had a good retort for.
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
But don't forget, it am the only biased one here.
Again there strawguy....i don't recall saying that.
Bottom line is, i've tried to take my bias out of the equation and see both sides. I have admitted that guys like Kesler and Burrows were bad for embellishment and though i feel Burrows has improved, Kesler has not (or did, and has relapsed to his old ways). I've given you my opinion that the Canucks have earned a reputation around the league and the makeup of the team needs to change. I have not sat here claiming that the league is out to get them or that the refs are out to get them or that there's some sort of conspiracy theory going against them. I've removed my bias and made my points. Time for you to do the same.
Here, try it with this.........Do you feel that Joe Thornton embellished the slashing call. *PLEASE NOTE*, i'm not asking you if you think it was a penalty, just whether or not he embellished the slash to make sure it was called?
Here, in case you wanna double check before you answer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khCm7Ly0pjk
|
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2013 : 13:36:10
|
Honestly Alex, I didn't watch a pile of the series between San Jose and Vancouver. I don't know who got the calls and who didn't. I do know who was complaining about it the most. And it's hard for me to think that most of the penalties were not deserved when Vancouver is almost always the playoff penalty leader. Where there is smoke there is often fire.
As far as the division comments and they played in a weak division. Sure. I agree. But that doesn't change the fact that Vancouver was almost aways a top 10 team in the NHL as well. Plus a Pres Trophy winner twice. To only make it out of the 2nd round once in 10 years for a team as good as they should be is underacheiving.
As far as my bias, whatever. There is nothing I can do to convice you otherwise but I think that Vancouver does complain about the refs and the way they are treated more than most teams out there. I'm not saying bad calls don't happen and that teams (and fans) don't get upset with bad calls. I just think Vancouver complains about it more than most. I think their coach is one of the biggest complainers in the league. So when the leader is a complainer the followers think it's ok.
We'll see what Gillis does in the offseason unless he is fired too. As much as I hate the Canucks, there are some great fans of that team like Alex and Nux to name a few. Not until Slozo and Leafs81, I hope those guys see TO come back and win against Boston. I am not cheering for the Leafs but I want to see those guys get to see good things happen to their team. The same goes for Vancouver. I'd like to see Alex and Nux see the Canucks succeed. They are great fans and deserve it.
But that doesn't change my opinion that the team doesn't know how to win, which makes them losers by default. And, it doesn't change my opinion that their coach and players complain a lot more than other teams do. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2013 : 15:13:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Honestly Alex, I didn't watch a pile of the series between San Jose and Vancouver. I don't know who got the calls and who didn't. I do know who was complaining about it the most. And it's hard for me to think that most of the penalties were not deserved when Vancouver is almost always the playoff penalty leader. Where there is smoke there is often fire.
I couldn't agree more. The Canucks complained more than the Sharks. However, the Sharks really didn't have a lot to complain about. I won't bother going into my reasons why i believe the Canucks get the "short end of the stick" on a lot of 50/50 calls. It's all in my posts above. I will not deny that some calls were deserved, but many, were very questionable and SJ did the job on the PP and won the games. The team that played better playoff hockey won. Simple as that. Even without ANY questionable calls, i think the Sharks win that series. They had the Canucks number all year, i just don't think they'd have swept them. Heck, i even picked Sharks in 6.
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
As far as the division comments and they played in a weak division. Sure. I agree. But that doesn't change the fact that Vancouver was almost aways a top 10 team in the NHL as well. Plus a Pres Trophy winner twice. To only make it out of the 2nd round once in 10 years for a team as good as they should be is underacheiving.
Absolutely. I won't deny that they've underachieved. And yet again, i'll emphasise that my problem was with the way Willis portrayed them as "losers". It is implied that the core of the team hasn't, can't, never will, etc win at important times. If the Cup is the be all end all, there's a lot of so called "losers" out there! The other problem is, we'd be sitting here debating if the Canucks had gone to the semi's for 9 of the last 10 years, only you'd be saying they're losers because "they can't win when it matters most" or something along those lines!
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
As far as my bias, whatever. There is nothing I can do to convice you otherwise but I think that Vancouver does complain about the refs and the way they are treated more than most teams out there. I'm not saying bad calls don't happen and that teams (and fans) don't get upset with bad calls. I just think Vancouver complains about it more than most. I think their coach is one of the biggest complainers in the league. So when the leader is a complainer the followers think it's ok.
Once more, i won't deny this. But like i explained, i really believe the Canucks and the reputation they've earned, do tend to get the short end of the stick when it comes to borderline calls, more often than most teams. I'm not alone on this btw, i've heard it discussed on "the panel", on radio and television sports shows, etc., and not just in the Vancouver market. This is why, i think they need to make a few big changes and shake up the roster to a point that it's a fresh start.
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
We'll see what Gillis does in the offseason unless he is fired too.
Personally, i don't see Gillis going. AV for sure, but i think Gillis is in good with the owners and i don't think he'll be relieved of his duties. He's been pretty good at the contract end of things and he's made some good deals. Sure, there's some that don't look great right now, but every GM has some of those. Not to mention, most of those deals were considered good when they were made. Take Booth for example. Many call it a bust of a deal, but do they remember what the trade actually was? To refresh anyone who doesn't, it was Booth, Reinprecht AND a 3rd for Marco Sturm and Mikael Samuelsson. Today, many call Booth a "bust" and the trade "awful". Really? Cuz those same people are likely the ones who, like me, thought the trade was great at the time! Unfortunately for Booth, he can't seem to stay away from injuries and it's affected his development / success.
Ballard is another example. Personally i didn't love the deal, but many around here did. I didn't like the 1st rounder they threw in but had no problem with Grabner being dealt. Either way, whether it was the hip injury he brought to Vancouver or the coach just not liking his game, he's been virtually useless here. What i'm getting at is it's very easy to complain about dead weight on a team, but it's not really fair if the same complainers were applauding the aquisitions at the time.
Anyway, i'm off topic and should start a new "What will the Nucks (just for you) do now?" thread i guess?
I think i'll leave that for now........ |
|
|
|
Guest6891
( )
|
Posted - 05/11/2013 : 03:28:59
|
Just another Canuck fan. Making up every excuse there is instead of sucking it up just winning a game. Teams are defined by their success in the playoffs not the regular season.
I think people are sick and tired of this organization ccomplaining about ref and bounces when they should be giving credit to the team that beat them . |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2013 : 08:50:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest6891
Just another Canuck fan. Making up every excuse there is instead of sucking it up just winning a game.
WOW! You nailed it. I'm busted for my inpetitude. As a fan, i definitely ought to have "sucked it up and won a game" for the Canucks.
quote:
Originally posted by Guest6891
I think people are sick and tired of this organization ccomplaining about ref and bounces when they should be giving credit to the team that beat them .
Guest, by any chance, did you even read the posts above before making these comments? If you did, your reading comprehension needs work. You might notice Nuxfan's post about the comments made by the coach? You might notice the one where i said the better team won? I get it, many Canucks fans do just whine and complain, however, i don't think i'm one of them that you should be singling out as "Just another Canucks fan making up every excuse, blah, blah, blah......" |
|
|
|
Guest6892
( )
|
Posted - 05/11/2013 : 09:46:07
|
| I apologize. I was referring to the players sucking it up. If Bieksa or AV came out and said we got beat by a team that out played us then i think people MAY start to look at this team differently. The organization players, front office and some fans have this sense of accomplishment |
|
|
|
Guest9848
( )
|
Posted - 05/11/2013 : 09:51:40
|
| I agree with Beans on this one. The other night Bieksa gos out and says o well the Sharks are embellishing the calls, instead of saying our penalty kill needs to be better because their power play is strong. They make excuses instead of owning their mistakes and addressing them. |
|
|
|
Guest9848
( )
|
Posted - 05/11/2013 : 10:01:22
|
| Schneider, who was unable to even back up Luongo in the first two games, made the trip to San Jose, feeding the rumor mill that he would play in Game 3. "It may be a great thing for us. I think Luongo's been tremendous," McLellan said. "If they want to take that quality of a goaltender out of the lineup and go to the other one, we'll take our chances with that as well." |
|
|
|
The Duke
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1239 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2013 : 11:21:53
|
Alex and Nuxfan, the canucks are paying the Sedin twins to lead them in the playoffs. Leadership is not just putting some good numbers on the sroresheet.
These 2 are getting paid big $$$$$$ to fufill this role. In my eyes anyway, they are not the type of players to take a team by horns and push them ahead. ( that one year the canucks went to the cup, i thought kesler and Luongo were their leaders.....Kesler got hurt....the canucks fell apart ).
Maybe when people say the canucks core are losers, this is what they are refering to...i don`t know...this is just my opinion.
With regards to the goal-tending situation......how would you feel if you were one of the all-time greats ( which i think Luongo is )......you lead your team to the stanley cup finals ( game 7 was it ? ).....multi - division titles, year in and year out......and your reward is........
Every 2nd game a young kid takes your spot in all big games ???.....lmao.....unreal
Do you know how many times a great goalie will earn a shut - out after after having a bad game ??........i guess you don`t being a Canucks fan because they don`t get the chance. |
|
|
|
Guest9808
( )
|
Posted - 05/11/2013 : 11:42:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Duke
Alex and Nuxfan, the canucks are paying the Sedin twins to lead them in the playoffs. Leadership is not just putting some good numbers on the sroresheet.
These 2 are getting paid big $$$$$$ to fufill this role. In my eyes anyway, they are not the type of players to take a team by horns and push them ahead. ( that one year the canucks went to the cup, i thought kesler and Luongo were their leaders.....Kesler got hurt....the canucks fell apart ).
Maybe when people say the canucks core are losers, this is what they are refering to...i don`t know...this is just my opinion.
Oh the irony of a Leafs fan commenting on the lack of success by the Canucks due to leadership. You wrote this for comic relief right? |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2013 : 16:35:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
I'm biased but the Canuck fans are not? That's rich. Don't believe me? Here you go.
Headline, " Bieksa accuses Sharks of Embelishing"
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=669524
Bieksa does eventually say they need to be more disciplined but only after he says this:
"Five-on-five, we're the better team. Their power play's been hot. We've been giving them too many chances. There's guys on their team, two guys in particular, that are embellishing a lot of calls, making it tough on the officials."
and then further down the article:
"We absolutely have to be more disciplined," Bieksa said. "After the whistle, we can't have anything of that anymore. We have to have learned our lesson from there. This is a good power play, especially their first unit. They're going out there, they're getting a lot of chances, they're making plays. We can't give them more opportunities. We have to make them earn those chances. Obviously the onus is on us to be more disciplined."
Beans, I guess it depends on what you want to see. I see a guy that is frustrated by feeling his team is not getting a fair shake from the refs, but clearly acknowledging that his team needs to play better and take those chances away. You see a guy that is blaming his teams loss solely on the refereeing. There is a big difference between the two.
You mentioned you didn't seem much of the series. I watched every minute. The Canucks deserved (nearly) all of the calls that went against them, I'm not going to sit here and claim they were angels - they can play undisciplined hockey at times, and they get caught. However, SJ were also not angels, and deserved more than they got - IMO got away with enough to leave questions. Despite the sweep, except for game 3 this was a very tight series - 2 OT games and one won in the 3rd. I don't recall a penalty differential so wide in a series that was so close.
quote:
Originally posted by Duke
With regards to the goal-tending situation......how would you feel if you were one of the all-time greats ( which i think Luongo is )......you lead your team to the stanley cup finals ( game 7 was it ? ).....multi - division titles, year in and year out......and your reward is........
Every 2nd game a young kid takes your spot in all big games ???.....lmao.....unreal
Do you know how many times a great goalie will earn a shut - out after after having a bad game ??........i guess you don`t being a Canucks fan because they don`t get the chance.
Duke, I don't know what you're getting at here. Every second game? "The young kid" has been taking Luongo's spot all year long, because he is the starting goalie going forward, and Luongo is not in the long term plans of the Canucks. Luongo played because the starting goalie was injured - once healthy, the starting goalie took over, same as any other team.
I'm pretty sure Luongo's feelings had very little if anything to do with the series loss. However, they might have rushed Schneider back from his groin injury... game 3 was certainly not his finest moment. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2013 : 22:10:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest6892
I apologize. I was referring to the players sucking it up. If Bieksa or AV came out and said we got beat by a team that out played us then i think people MAY start to look at this team differently. The organization players, front office and some fans have this sense of accomplishment
Personally, i disagree. I think it's gonna take more than that for this team to be looked at differently for the haters. As far as the team having some sort of "sense of accomplishment", i'm tired of asking for proof. I've heard this so many times yet every time i ask someone for examples of what any Canuck has said or done to imply this, i come up empty??? If you said Canucks fans (i'd prefer "some" Canucks fans) then i might buy it, but to accuse the actual team of portraying this ridiculous. Please feel free to prove me wrong! |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2013 : 22:16:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest9848
I agree with Beans on this one. The other night Bieksa gos out and says o well the Sharks are embellishing the calls, instead of saying our penalty kill needs to be better because their power play is strong. They make excuses instead of owning their mistakes and addressing them.
In fairness, Bieksa did both. Go back and listen to his post game interview and he gives a ton of credit to the SJ powerplay. He just doesn't agree with the way they're getting the PP chances.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQRjbrT7phw
Best thing he said comes at 1:35 when asked about his team having a history of embellishment. He doesn't deny it. For anyone who doesn't know it, he called his own team mates out for it a couple years back!!! Thing is, he's talking about today (the other day). |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Loves watching the Nucks Loss 
