Things change. It's one of the unavoidable facts of life. Even the things you hold dearest in your heart, eventually they change for whatever reason. Sometimes the change is good, other times not so much. The best part about it, is that we as a species will perpetually have something to complain about. It comes as naturally to some as breathing. I get that change, in a lot of different circumstances is a good thing. Evolution of certain things is a must. But that still doesn't stop me from bitching about it. Saturday mornings used to mean a 5 to 6 hour window of awesome cartoon violence and hilarity when I was a kid. Now, it's all thinly veiled advertisements for toys and various other crap, infomercials, and other stuff kids (even grown up ones) don't wanna watch. I hate this. Another thing that changes? Narratives. And more than just a win yesterday, the Canucks served up a hot, steaming cup of STFU (with Boston's gracious help, of course) on a number of these narratives. It's been a while since we raised our voices at you, but you didn't think 2012 meant no more old men beaking off, did you? Fools. Here's the Big Bad Broons Edition of GET OFF MY LAWN!!!!
AS GOOD AS MATLOCK AND APPLESAUCE
YC: My Hodgson mancrush is bordering on the absurd. I've renamed my dog Thunderdome, have bedazzled Silent G on all my underwear and just finished the paperwork to change my name to Cody's "Dazzling" Franchise. Forget that Burrows tipped in his shot to knot the game at two a piece, but watch what turned out to be the game winner. It's exactly that type of blasting down the wing and sniping a score that Vancouver has often been lacking. Did anyone beat Thomas with such a shot in seven games last year? Nope. At this point Hodgson is on pace for a 51 point season which would put him in the top ten best seasons for a Vancouver rookie. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to a tattoo shop to get Cody's face tattooed on mine.
KB: In a game where many felt that there was no way for the Canucks to come out winners even with a win on the scoreboard, by sticking with their gameplan, Alain Vigneault's Canucks came into Boston and walked away with 2 points. They also reclaimed a boat load of dignity taken not by the Bruins, but by media types who time and time again built up the legend of the Bruins from elite hockey team (which they are) to mythical creature that gives Chuck Norris bed wetting night terrors (which they are not). Unlike how the Canucks have proven other teams wrong by thinking if you try and goon it up to beat them because they are soft, the Canucks laid out a blueprint for taking down Boston: you don't have to go toe to toe with them. You do however have to look them in the eye and Do. Not. Flinch. Steve Dangle wrote about this and the Bruins in an article, referring to it as 'the punk test'. In the Stanley Cup Finals, the Canucks did indeed fail the punk test. I do vehemently disagree (as you know) with the assessment that this is why they lost to Boston. It did however play a role in it. The Canucks withstood the storm of stupidity and showed in fact, they are not soft. They outhit the Bruins in their own rink. They showed well in the fights (though Weise looked like an ass backing down from Thornton). Then, they did another thing that didn't happen in June. They made Boston afraid.
By the time Cody Hodgson ripped a slapshot past Tim Thomas for their 4th power play goal of the game, the message to Boston was clear: Take a penalty and we will score on you. And it chilled them out. I liked that for the most part, the Canucks big players were their big players. Look at who scored the goals: Ryan Kesler. Alexandre Burrows. Henrik Sedin. It was just a game in January, but this game was as much about sending a message to the rest of the NHL than to Boston: If you really think we're soft, you will find out the hard way just how wrong it is. I liked that the early penalties forced the Canucks to kill another narrative about Henrik and Daniel: they can't kill penalties. The Canucks PK was the unsung hero in yesterday's win. It was a given they would need to kill off penalties, and they did so with authority. The B's power play was rendered ineffective, and in turn helped keep the Canucks with the momentum they needed. I also liked Marchand's game yesterday. I like the fact that even after scoring a couple PP goals, he decided that taking out a Canucks player with a hit far dirtier than anything the Canucks did in the playoffs was more important than helping his team get a win. He, Lucic, Thornton, Horton... they all showed their true colours yesterday. The B's media and a few of their agents in the MSM were quick to defend every and all actions by the Broons, of course. But much like the Rowdy Roddy Piper classic 'They Live', the rest of the hockey world put on the goggles of common sense yesterday and saw Marshmont and the Broons for what they really are.
The game also showed what we said all along: A healthy Canucks team would have made that series a much different beast indeed.
SZ: The Canucks went 2-0-1 last week, with the only loss coming in a shootout against the Sharks. Cody Hodgson had 2 goals and 2 assists in those 3 games. What a week for him! I liked the play of Roberto Luongo against the Sharks and Wild. He's dialed in. He looks like a world class goalie and I am not hearing much from the haters peanut gallery lately. Of course I liked the Bruins game. No, I loved it. But I have already said enough about that.
FRIGGIN KIDS WITH THEIR RAP MUSIC, CELL PHONES AND PROMISING FUTURES
YC: Was the game a pure shit show? Sure. Was either team as smart or as disciplined as they should have been? Not even close. Everyone will move on now, but I'd be remiss if I didn't turn my cross-hairs back at Jack Edwards, a more embarrassing, horrific human being with access to a mic and zero filtering capabilities you'd be hard pressed to find (and I say this knowing full well Vancouver's own broadcasters aren't on the level either). Jackass was at his typical trolling self during that first period, being astonished by the lack of calls when any Boston player
dove fell over while proclaiming openly at one point that Vancouver spent "after an entire summer of having their manhoods challenged." Riiiiiiight. But hey if there's anyone who would know about having his manhood questioned time and time again, it's Jack Edwards. His incessant whining - combined with whatever "kill him" or Luongo chant the fans could cough up between beer runs - painted a truly pathetic scene for anyone watching on TV. We all get Edward's schtick by now and God knows he's been far worse but he personifies exactly why this idea will remain high on the dream list for millions of hockey fans.
KB: I want to say this was the best game the Canucks played all season, but that would be a lie. In a way, this could be part of what I liked, because they were able to go into the most hostile of territories and walk out
with 2 points. But there were stretches during this game where the Canucks played like it was opening night. Kevin Bieksa and Alex Edler were bloody awful yesterday. Fortunately the play of the other Dmen more than made up for it. But the play of those two did the Canucks zero favours yesterday. I really hated this lady right here. You know we in the Smylosphere have had it with sisters references but this is just ridiculous.
DAUGHTER: What are you doing, Mommy?
MOM: I'm making paper dolls for the hockey game, sweetie.
D: Paper dolls? Why, Mommy?
M: Because honey, these two boys play for the Vancouver Canucks, and since as a Bruins fan I suffer from the inability to come up with any original, intelligent criticism of things that oppose my team, so I choose to emasculate them by referring to them as girls. By calling them females, it means they are weak, and not as good as the men
who play for my beloved Bruins.
D: But we're girls, Mommy.
M: Yes sweetie, we are. And when you get older you'll learn that you need to play dumb and attract a man with lots of money so you won't have to go out and get a job. That's why Daddy married me.
D: Is that why you drink so much, Mommy?
M: Yes baby. That's why Mommy drinks so much.
Once again, this could have been posted on the What I Liked section, because it was a beautiful portrail of the idiocy of some of the Bruins fanbase. You embarrass the game of hockey when you use sexist, misogynistic, racist or homophobic slurs against other players or fans. Don't do it. Get it out of the game. That's not just towards B's fans but all fans, including our own. Strive to be better than this. Finally (and this is related), I hated that in a game where we saw this nonsense, we are treated to the hypocrisy of calling our best players girls, when on Boston's side there was not a single player who stood up like a man and accepted responsibility for the loss. From coach Claude Julien to Marchand and Thornton, we saw blame, wild accusations, denial and outright lies. And zero responsibility from their side. I don't expect the Boston media to call out their own team. They don't, and haven't for years. Why would they? They're so entrenched in spreading the team's message I wouldn't be surprised if they all got rings. But let me tell you something. After the Game 7 loss, Daniel, Henrik, Kes, Juice and Lu, the leaders of this team stood there in that dressing room and took FULL responsibility, none more so than Hank and Danny. They shouldered the blame because that is what men do. They don't blame others. They don't manipulate events to portray a narrative. They don't lie and they don't whine. They are accountable. Where is the accountability on the Boston Bruins for anything they've ever done wrong? It is non-existent. And at long last people see this. Say what you will about the Bruins fans, but they surely deserve better than what they were shown yesterday. Their team was quite simply everything they accused the Canucks of being. The worst part is, they've been that way all along.
SZ: We lost Sami Salo to a concussion because of that dirty rat Brad Marchand. Hopefully it's not too serious. He is a rock and a vital part of the team's success.