Posted on 03/30/2002 7:53:37 PM PST by malakhi
I've always like the Canucks, since I rooted for them in 94 to beat the hated Rangers.
The NHL shows their stupidit of scheduling once again. One of the series in the last round was the same way. There is no reason that games 6 and 7 should be played on consecutive days. Especially since travel is involved. Garage league.
SD
They are something else. And I thought the Avs had a pretty good team. Just as, if not better, than their cup teams. I like playoff game 7's.
Absolutely. And overtime game 7s are even better. My motto is "the only thing beter than hockey is more hockey."
But let the guys have a rest, huh? Finish up a game at 12:30am eastern, fly to Vancouver and play again tonight at 10. And this is for all the marbles? Ridiculous.
SD
SD
There is a funny thing with the schedule of the NBA playoff series between Detroit and Philadelphia. Games 3 and 4 will be played in Philly, and are scheduled for back-to-back nights. The reason they can't have a day off between games 3 and 4 is because the arena has a WWE wrestling event scheduled for that day! Talk about garage league.
I did see this, Mack, I just haven't had time to think about it.
Arenas do have the right to other events, as playoff games are never guaranteed. And the league may insert days or remove them for TV (the Saturday day games on ABC).
But there is a vast difference between playing games 3 and 4 consecutively and scheduling 6 and 7 that way.
(Hmmm. Maybe they're "gambling" that game 7 won't be necessary.)
SD
Well, do you want to see a sloppy game or a decent one? When the players are overly tired you lack crisp passing and the timing is off and nobody wants to take any risks.
SD
Both clubs at same disadvantage. They'll compete.
It's obvious to any intelligent person that they choose it. Their train of thought must go like this: "I find sex with people of my own sex repulsive. But I will force myself to do it, and pretend that I like it, because I know that it irritates the bejeezus out of fundamentalists. Matter of fact, I will move in with someone of my own gender, and pretend that I'm in love with them, because I want to make a political statement." Who could believe that they don't choose it? Why, it's the logical answer. I mean, they couldn't really be innately attracted to people of their own gender through no volition of their own. Could they?
If its not a choice they must have magnetic pelvic bones.
Thanks a lot Dave. I move up on the list? lol
Some moron wrote a letter to the editor published today (still riding the Santorum comments in these parts), stating as a fact that the debate is over and science has proved that gays are born that way. Which is not true.
But that was beside the point. His point was that Santorum believes in an "unjust" God who makes people gay and then doesnt' want them to express their powerful sexual urges.
Which is a load of crap. This same God also makes people alcoholic (which is more scientifically shown to run in families), but that doesn't mean we should celebrate and encourage them to do what comes naturally. It doesnt' mean that God wants them to drink all they can.
To your acquaintenance's letter, the proper response is only that one can have deep psychological disturbances without this being evidence of an "innate" nature of the disordered attraction.
SD
I thought you might like the excitement of doing 6 furlongs in a minute 12. LOL
SD
(malakhi) Reg made his comment yesterday, so he was exactly correct.
(IAmStillWrong) Great. So now I'm the liar.
No. You were only off by one day. That's hardly a lie. ;-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.