Goaltending Recruit

[calgARI '07]

I'm sorry, I just don't see what the problem is.  The people that have a problem with me seem to be angry with my tone among other things.  You don't seem to like how I talk...on an online forum.  I have done nothing but speak my opinion and back it up to the best of my ability.  If you don't like what I have to say, simply disagree or don't read it.  I am not going to change my feelings on the team just because some people don't like what I have to say.  Counter my opinions with opinions of your own, not some character analysis that you are basing from online rhetoric.  I have no idea why some of you are taking exception with me and questioning my credibility.  Do it all you want.  I really don't care whether you think I am credible or not.  I know I am credible regardless of how some of you define the word.  If you want to rip me apart because of my wording and tone on an online forum, have a ball.  We can duke it out over hockey as much as you want to.  But I am not going to stray from my opinions just so you guys can feel better.  
I'm sorry I have offended or bothered anyone, I really am.  But that was absolutely not my intention at any time and I am having trouble seeing how I could have offended anyone with my opinions on the Cornell hockey team.  Sure, criticize my opinions, but NO, you do not have the right to call me a douche bag for haivng them.  I have met Ben before and really liked him.  Just because we disagree on Cornell hockey does not mean we have to have some personality conflict.  It just makes no sense.  But I beg you, stop putting words into my mouth based on my tone (examples being that I think I am some sort of "guru" or better fan).  That is total BS unless you can find one instance where I have claimed to be a "hockey guru" or a greater fan than anyone.  
I should also point out that just because I am criticizing certain players or the team as a whole does not mean I am not behind them, it simply means that I care and am analyzing what it is they are not playing well (from my opinion of course).  I am freakin' Calgary Flames fan, a team that missed the playoffs for seven years and I stuck with them through thick and thin.  Now they have finally made the playoffs and I am very proud to say that I was one of the few fans that stuck with the team through the really bad years and can sit back and finally enjoy playoff hockey.  I take offense when anybody insinuates that I am not sticking behind the team through thick and thin.
Bottom line is that I love Cornell hockey.  I love hockey in general.  I follow the sport very closely for several years.  I feel that I know the game very well.  I am very opinionated and passionate in general and that is most evident in how I speak about hockey.  People can disagree all they want and we can argue about whatever specific points you want to, no problem.  But if you are going to call out my character by calling me a "flaming asshole" and question my credibility and other things, I am not going to waste my time or this board's space having a character battle stemming from conflicting views on Cornell hockey.  
I hope we can end this argument as I really don't see what positive is coming out of it considering I am not going to sensor myself when I do not feel I am being unfair or breaking any sort of rules.  

[ice the puck]

calgARi,

You are a credit to the game and to Cornell.  Don't let idiots get you down.  Keep on doing what you are doing, and realize that there will always be some clowns out there who are not able to offer a rational argument or build a case.  Of course you are entitled to your opinions. Most of the quality readers of this board can distinguish between passionate Big Red fans with a brain, and the jerks who attack them.. !!

[DisplacedCornellian]

Ari,

I don't think anybody is calling you a douchebag for having the opinions that you do (at least I'm not), it is more the way that you express them.  I can't put my finger on what it is, but if something comes up in your future posts that makes me realize what it is then I will try to point it out in as civil a manner as possible.  

In any event, this argument is pretty pointless.  To the extent that I'm responsible for making it descend to the level of civility of a USCHO thread, I apologize.  

[Pete Godenschwager]

[Q]calgARi,

You are a credit to the game and to Cornell. Don't let idiots get you down. Keep on doing what you are doing, and realize that there will always be some clowns out there who are not able to offer a rational argument or build a case. Of course you are entitled to your opinions. Most of the quality readers of this board can distinguish between passionate Big Red fans with a brain, and the jerks who attack them.. !![/Q]

ditto

[BigD]

[Q]calgARI '07 Wrote:

 Let me just ask this: if LeNeveu was as amazing last year as his numbers indicated (best ever GAA), why didn't he win the Hobey? [/Q]

Lenny's chances of winning the Hobey were slim at best to begin with. Historically speaking only one or two other goaltenders have won the Hobey, and one  of those was just a couple of years ago. I doubt that winning or losing had much to do with the final choice, it just wasn't going to be another goaltender no matter what. High-scoring forwards at big-program schools are just more likely to be chosen because they have a lot more exposure and their programs have a lot more respect from the majority of the media and the people who make these choices. No matter how well the ECAC manages to do, all the other leagues still consider us the "Easy Collegiate Athletic Conference."

[calgARI '07]

[Q]BigD Wrote:

 calgARI '07 Wrote:

 Let me just ask this: if LeNeveu was as amazing last year as his numbers indicated (best ever GAA), why didn't he win the Hobey?

Lenny's chances of winning the Hobey were slim at best to begin with. Historically speaking only one or two other goaltenders have won the Hobey, and one  of those was just a couple of years ago. I doubt that winning or losing had much to do with the final choice, it just wasn't going to be another goaltender no matter what. High-scoring forwards at big-program schools are just more likely to be chosen because they have a lot more exposure and their programs have a lot more respect from the majority of the media and the people who make these choices. No matter how well the ECAC manages to do, all the other leagues still consider us the "Easy Collegiate Athletic Conference." [/Q]

Rightfully so though, eh?  If I were a voter it would be hard for me to give the ECAC nearly as much respect as the three other major conferences.  It does generate a respectable national contender every few years though.  It would have done wonders for the conference's beat up reputation for St. Lawrence (when they were really good) or Cornell to win the whole thing when they were out their respective bests.