It's been a while since I updated, apologies for that (who am I apologizing to, no one actually reads this blog, therefore no one would care that I haven't updated. But I digress...)
Well, the Sharks just beat the Wings. In Detroit. 5-2. Logan got 2 goals. Awesome for him.
Was totally planning on actually analyzing the game, but I have an AP Chemistry midterm to study for. Kinetics. Apparently there's a bunch of kinetics stuff on the AP, so I should probably actually learn this stuff.
In a couple days, or maybe tomorrow, not sure, I'm going to post something fun. Expect either something to do with Biology gone wrong or a scientific (kind of) analysis of sports. Depends on what I feel like writing. (Also, who is expecting anything? If there are no readers of the blog, should I really be telling these "readers" to expect anything? If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?)
If you're lucky, you'll even get a post written during my Chinese class tomorrow. But, that's a long shot, seeing as we have a test coming up on Friday. Or Monday. Not sure, better check on that. Well, probably expect a post during my free period, or during conference period when I will inevitably have nothing to do.
(Also, the title of this post does have a deeper meaning than 'it's been a long time since I posted'- I've recently discovered this band called Boston, and one of their songs is called "Long Time," and it's one of my new favorite songs. While we're thinking about music, I'm learning to play Silent Night on the organ. Which, for me, is kind of incredible, considering I have like, zero musical ability.)
Where we're always listening to the * song.
Monday, December 6, 2010
Thursday, November 18, 2010
My Thoughts on Col/Dal and Colin Campbell
In the game against the Avalanche, the Sharks were up 3-1 in the third. What happened? They let Colorado score two quick ones to tie the game. And then they lost in overtime. Earlier in the game Jamie McGinn's goal had been disallowed due to a high stick.
In the game against the Stars, the Sharks were up 4-2 in the third. What happened? They let Dallas score two really quick ones to tie the game. And then they lost in overtime. Earlier in the game a Marc-Edouard Vlasic goal had been disallowed due to a high stick.
Now, certainly the Sharks seemed to turn off the lightswitch in the end of the third in both games, but does it strike anyone else as odd that these two games were eerily similar? One should not be able to recap two games using the same sentence structure, just switching out specifics (and reason for the disallowed goal did not even have to be switched). I'm honestly not sure which game was worse, Dallas or Colorado. After the Avs game, I thought, Well, at least we didn't score the game winner for the Avs. I don't know what to think about the Dallas game. At least it didn't go to the fourth overtime? Well, games no longer can go to the fourth overtime during the regular season. Sure, there were some pretty weak calls and some pretty blatant noncalls at the end of the third and in the beginning of OT, but still. Sharks, what is up?
The Good from the Dallas Game
Now we get to some of the interesting stuff; Colin Campbell Controversy. (hooray for alliteration)
I may be a somewhat "newer" hockey fan, but I'm old enough to know that doing the kind of sh*t Campbell did can get you into a lot of trouble. This kind of situation can range from a middle school class to some of the world's most powerful organizations, but the lesson is always the same; don't send anything in an email that you wouldn't want anyone to discover. In today's day and age, that is Email Lesson #1. Everyone makes that mistake at least once in their emailing life, but the smart ones learn from their mistakes, and giving that multiple Colie emails were found, it's pretty obvious Campbell did not learn a lesson. Will he learn the lesson now? Well, probably not, but we can always hope. Of course, one of the bigger issues here is that the NHL is not addressing the problem, merely supporting Campbell, and with no supporting evidence. This tidbit of information I learned from just about every teacher I have had in the past 5 or so years; you may argue whatever you like, but you better be able to back it up. Bettman and the NHL are arguing that Campbell's emails were taken out of context, and nothing came of the situation, but they are not offering any supportive evidence to convince the teams, players, media, and fans of it. Another way to approach the NHL's response is to look at the way in which they are responding. It can be analyzed as ineffective. Now, in contrast to the NHL, I will actually back up that thesis.
Bettman and Campbell first released an official statement that stated that Campbell was just venting as a "hockey dad," but in that statement, they only addressed the issue of familial conflict of interest; they did nothing to dispel the rumors about Marc Savard, and they also did not address the issue of vulgarity in the emails. This statement is ineffective on two levels; one, it does not address the majority of the issue, and two, the NHL and Campbell are not accepting the blame, or the accountability for what Campbell did. As I learned in a class called Individual and Society (INS for short) a leader can save face and maintain more power if they admit to their wrongdoings, even if it was not their fault in the first place. Passing the blame off makes people more suspicious, and denial makes people even more suspicious. Also, the lack of addressing an issue will always come back to bite you in the .... That is just a simple lesson from life.
Today, Colie was on a couple radio shows, and Bettman released his official statement about Colin Campbell. I listened to all of them, and it sounded like I was listening to politicians. Perhaps, in a way, that's what they are, but in case you've been living under a rock, politicians are not exactly viewed in a good light right now. Also, Bettman's statement was incredibly vague and defended Campbell as a person but did little to defend the way he does his job. Bettman also describes these claims brought against Campbell as the musings of "some people on the Internet and in the media," but Bettman fails to realize that the NHL has one of the largest blogospheres of any pro sport, and that his target audience is those specific people he condemns. Bettman also refers to the claims against Campbell simply as "allegations" or "assertions" which only furthers the idea that he is denying the entire idea that Campbell did anything wrong. I could go on and on about Bettman's statement, because the entire statement was a load of trash, but I will spare you.
Campbell's phone interview was perhaps worse than Bettman's statement. At first he tried to justify the two suspensions he handed out that day, but his explanations were convoluted and eventually he wandered entirely off topic. Also, referring to the emails, he said they were taken out of context, mentioned that they were from at least three years ago, and said that they were just emails thrown around the office. The age of the emails is not relevant. Campbell, you still sent those emails. That you sent them a few years ago does not negate the fact that you sent them. Also, even if you are just emailing some close colleagues in the office, that is no excuse for profanity. These were your work emails. People are questioning how you do your job, and the fact that you used profanity in your emails indicates that you are not very professional. People already question how you do things (see Wheel of Fortune, Suspension Flowchart). This does not help your cause.
What the NHL and Campbell should have done differently....
In the game against the Stars, the Sharks were up 4-2 in the third. What happened? They let Dallas score two really quick ones to tie the game. And then they lost in overtime. Earlier in the game a Marc-Edouard Vlasic goal had been disallowed due to a high stick.
Now, certainly the Sharks seemed to turn off the lightswitch in the end of the third in both games, but does it strike anyone else as odd that these two games were eerily similar? One should not be able to recap two games using the same sentence structure, just switching out specifics (and reason for the disallowed goal did not even have to be switched). I'm honestly not sure which game was worse, Dallas or Colorado. After the Avs game, I thought, Well, at least we didn't score the game winner for the Avs. I don't know what to think about the Dallas game. At least it didn't go to the fourth overtime? Well, games no longer can go to the fourth overtime during the regular season. Sure, there were some pretty weak calls and some pretty blatant noncalls at the end of the third and in the beginning of OT, but still. Sharks, what is up?
The Good from the Dallas Game
- Marc-Edouard Vlasic finally picked up a point. Actually though, he looked much stronger offensively tonight.
- The Sharks scored four goals in a row after being down 2-0.
- Scott Nichol was an absolute beast tonight.
- Joe Pavelski was also a beast, taking a puck to the face (on the bench!) and coming back to play out the end of the game.
- Patrick Marleau and Jason Demers looked really good together coming through the neutral zone and into the offensive zone. Nice passing, and quick skating, led to a couple scoring chances.
- Niemi's glove hand looked strong.
- (Not counting the fights, which I don't) The Sharks were a lot better with staying out of the penalty box.
- The Sharks allowed Dallas to score the first two goals.
- The Sharks allowed Dallas to tie up the game, and allowed them to score those two goals in a matter of seconds.
- They lost in overtime. Again. (see above)
- Niemi had some issues with giving up rebounds, and he had a hard time finding the puck when there was a lot of traffic in front of the net. This inability to see the puck through traffic led to all of Dallas' goals.
- The Sharks did not convert a single powerplay on this road trip.
Now we get to some of the interesting stuff; Colin Campbell Controversy. (hooray for alliteration)
I may be a somewhat "newer" hockey fan, but I'm old enough to know that doing the kind of sh*t Campbell did can get you into a lot of trouble. This kind of situation can range from a middle school class to some of the world's most powerful organizations, but the lesson is always the same; don't send anything in an email that you wouldn't want anyone to discover. In today's day and age, that is Email Lesson #1. Everyone makes that mistake at least once in their emailing life, but the smart ones learn from their mistakes, and giving that multiple Colie emails were found, it's pretty obvious Campbell did not learn a lesson. Will he learn the lesson now? Well, probably not, but we can always hope. Of course, one of the bigger issues here is that the NHL is not addressing the problem, merely supporting Campbell, and with no supporting evidence. This tidbit of information I learned from just about every teacher I have had in the past 5 or so years; you may argue whatever you like, but you better be able to back it up. Bettman and the NHL are arguing that Campbell's emails were taken out of context, and nothing came of the situation, but they are not offering any supportive evidence to convince the teams, players, media, and fans of it. Another way to approach the NHL's response is to look at the way in which they are responding. It can be analyzed as ineffective. Now, in contrast to the NHL, I will actually back up that thesis.
Bettman and Campbell first released an official statement that stated that Campbell was just venting as a "hockey dad," but in that statement, they only addressed the issue of familial conflict of interest; they did nothing to dispel the rumors about Marc Savard, and they also did not address the issue of vulgarity in the emails. This statement is ineffective on two levels; one, it does not address the majority of the issue, and two, the NHL and Campbell are not accepting the blame, or the accountability for what Campbell did. As I learned in a class called Individual and Society (INS for short) a leader can save face and maintain more power if they admit to their wrongdoings, even if it was not their fault in the first place. Passing the blame off makes people more suspicious, and denial makes people even more suspicious. Also, the lack of addressing an issue will always come back to bite you in the .... That is just a simple lesson from life.
Today, Colie was on a couple radio shows, and Bettman released his official statement about Colin Campbell. I listened to all of them, and it sounded like I was listening to politicians. Perhaps, in a way, that's what they are, but in case you've been living under a rock, politicians are not exactly viewed in a good light right now. Also, Bettman's statement was incredibly vague and defended Campbell as a person but did little to defend the way he does his job. Bettman also describes these claims brought against Campbell as the musings of "some people on the Internet and in the media," but Bettman fails to realize that the NHL has one of the largest blogospheres of any pro sport, and that his target audience is those specific people he condemns. Bettman also refers to the claims against Campbell simply as "allegations" or "assertions" which only furthers the idea that he is denying the entire idea that Campbell did anything wrong. I could go on and on about Bettman's statement, because the entire statement was a load of trash, but I will spare you.
Campbell's phone interview was perhaps worse than Bettman's statement. At first he tried to justify the two suspensions he handed out that day, but his explanations were convoluted and eventually he wandered entirely off topic. Also, referring to the emails, he said they were taken out of context, mentioned that they were from at least three years ago, and said that they were just emails thrown around the office. The age of the emails is not relevant. Campbell, you still sent those emails. That you sent them a few years ago does not negate the fact that you sent them. Also, even if you are just emailing some close colleagues in the office, that is no excuse for profanity. These were your work emails. People are questioning how you do your job, and the fact that you used profanity in your emails indicates that you are not very professional. People already question how you do things (see Wheel of Fortune, Suspension Flowchart). This does not help your cause.
What the NHL and Campbell should have done differently....
- Campbell should not have made it into a laughing matter, referring to himself as just a hockey dad venting.
- Campbell should have accepted full responsibility for what he did, and apologized to any parties involved, including, but not limited to, Marc Savard, the Bruins, Gregory Campbell, the General Managers of the various franchises, the list goes on.
- While it was advisable for Bettman to remain loyal to Campbell (it gives the impression of no internal issues), he should not have ever had to deny that Campbell did anything wrong. As the commissioner of the NHL, it is his job to be sure his employees are functioning to their full capacity, and
- Bettman and Campbell should have addressed this issue within hours of the news breaking. Really, there is no excuse for them waiting a full day to speak to the public, and even address the issue at all. (Had they come out sooner to address the problem, less fans would be forced to rely upon news sources such as blogs for information; the sheer amount of blog posts about "Colie-Gate" that were available before the NHL's response indicates that many fans turned to alternative news sources for information and opinions.)
- Campbell steps down. I do not want to see him fired, I want to see him step down. It will portray him in a slightly better light if he is the one initiating the end of the job. Also, if Campbell steps down, it will look bad for Bettman.
- The NHL adopts a panel of judges for any supplemental disciplinary cases. There have been many write-ups that focus on this idea, enough that I do not need to go into details explaining how it will be more just if more people are ruling on the decisions.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
My Classmates' Views on Hockey... With Commentary by Sarah
The Sharks beat the Kings, the currently-fantastic Kings, and don't even get a mention on NHL.com. Besides the two goal oddity. But that doesn't count.
Also, what's up with Colin Campbell? Nothing, the NHL will make sure of that. The NHL Exec.s are disgusting.
I am in chinese class. Sarah is being awesome. (Sarah is dictating). Except she doesn't understand hockey.
Terrible. No one in this class understands hockey. No one in this school understands hockey. But people do know a fear things about hockey. Here's some of the stuff they know...
Sarah: "Hockey is played one ice! With ice skates! There's a puck. And sticks. And the sticks are phallic symbols. The point is to whack the puck in the other team's goal with your stick."
Suzie: "Hockey is violent. And they have a cool Shark as a mascot. It's really awesome. They crash into walls."
Sarah: "They crash into each other. Rawr."
Claire: "Hockey is a sport that has the Sharks in it and um it's there's a lot of fighting, but I hear it is fun to watch, most of the time."
Sarah: "It's fun to watch when they fall on each other."
Martha: "Um it's really fun to watch."
Sarah: "See above comment." (by which Sarah means above above from this one)
Shifrah: "A very violent sport."
Sarah: "Violence is in the eye of the beholder."
Amanda: "Hockey is a sport with bearded dudes."
Sarah: "Beards are sexy. Especially if you are Ke$ha. And you have a beard fetish. I do not have a beard fetish."
Yup. This is what I deal with on a day to day basis.
Also, what's up with Colin Campbell? Nothing, the NHL will make sure of that. The NHL Exec.s are disgusting.
I am in chinese class. Sarah is being awesome. (Sarah is dictating). Except she doesn't understand hockey.
Terrible. No one in this class understands hockey. No one in this school understands hockey. But people do know a fear things about hockey. Here's some of the stuff they know...
Sarah: "Hockey is played one ice! With ice skates! There's a puck. And sticks. And the sticks are phallic symbols. The point is to whack the puck in the other team's goal with your stick."
Suzie: "Hockey is violent. And they have a cool Shark as a mascot. It's really awesome. They crash into walls."
Sarah: "They crash into each other. Rawr."
Claire: "Hockey is a sport that has the Sharks in it and um it's there's a lot of fighting, but I hear it is fun to watch, most of the time."
Sarah: "It's fun to watch when they fall on each other."
Martha: "Um it's really fun to watch."
Sarah: "See above comment." (by which Sarah means above above from this one)
Shifrah: "A very violent sport."
Sarah: "Violence is in the eye of the beholder."
Amanda: "Hockey is a sport with bearded dudes."
Sarah: "Beards are sexy. Especially if you are Ke$ha. And you have a beard fetish. I do not have a beard fetish."
Yup. This is what I deal with on a day to day basis.
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Game Thoughts Live; Islanders at Sharks, 11-11-10
I turned the game on a second too late, so I missed the opening faceoff and the line combos.
Notes from the First
Notes from the Second
Notes from the First
- There seemed to be a lot more icing than usual, for both teams.
- Power Plays have not been too good tonight, or
- Penalty Kills have been very good tonight
- Both teams have been pretty good at clearing the puck on the PK
- Nitty's looked solid, having a bit of trouble with rebounds, but in this period, it looks like he mastered the leap-on-top-of-a-stray-rebound-to-avoid-second-chances.
- Most of the time the Sharks had some issues with passing, but occasionally HTML had some beautiful pass sequences that unfortunately didn't show up on the board.
- Logan Couture is boss, that kid is a fighter (not an instigator, more like he has "sticktoitedness", to steal a term from Drew)
Notes from the Second
- The refs actually got those calls right (didn't call Clowe's hit, called the cross-checking on McCarthy, who needs a nickname). Just saw the replay, shoulder to shoulder hit.
- Ahhaha! That's a huge size difference in those refs! Kind of like Lincoln and Douglas (that's were we are in US History).
- Little Joe is player winger for Logan? ....Interesting
- Logan may need to ask B Wilson for some help with his beard. Logan's beard is not one to fear.
- Thank god they could convert that 5 on 3. If they couldn't that would have been really sad.
- (4:40 left in the second) Joe Pavelski is due, he has 4 SOG in this game so far, 64 on the season and only 3 goals to show for it.
- It kind of worries me that the only goal we have came on a 5 on 3. Given, it only took us 11 seconds once we got the 2 man advantage, but then the next 1:44 of PP didn't help, and neither did any of the other PPs so far tonight. And certainly even strength has not been perfect for los tiburones.
- Ahaha that was great, Nitty just totally whacked that Islander in the legs
- Ugh. That call was disgusting. If a goalie is stupid enough to go that far out of the crease, he should not have the right to return.
- This is the second game in a row that what would have been the second Sharks goal is called back.
- Mitchy continues to impress me each game. That was a beautiful hit. Glad he's getting that confidence back. Oh, and Heatley just threw a check. A pretty good one, too.
- Lots of offsides in this third.
- I am still not used to this four on four format. Still stuck in 20min OT periods like the playoffs.
- Logan! Five hole, that was gorgeous.
- Oh my god. That was an absolutely beautiful save by Nitty. Absolutely awesome save.
- Nitty on shootouts; "It's fun when you win, it sucks when you lose"
No Gameday Post, Game's Started
Observant readers will notice that these first ever blog posts coincide with the return of Joe Thornton after that 2 game suspension. The NHL was wrong, but there wasn't anything we could do about it. We got three of four points. The Ducks won on a non-call followed by icing. Fun Fact: I met Jumbo during that game against the Ducks. Kind of a bittersweet meeting. Game notes from Islanders coming up.
A Brief Explanation of the Name, and URL...
As mentioned in the most exciting post you'll ever see on this blog, there are many blogs by the name "Puttin' On The Foil." Seriously, do a google search and you'll find one for just about every NHL team. Now why might that be? Well, probably because Slapshot is one of the greatest hockey movies ever made*, and besides which, it is also one of the most quotable**. I believe we rented Slapshot around the time of my first NHL game. All I know is, the movie was instantly a favorite, and still remains one of my favorite movies, which is rare (usually I get tired of movies pretty quickly). Anyhow, back to the whole there are a million blogs by this title idea. Basically, the URLs featuring the simple line puttinonthefoil or puttingonthefoil or a number of different variations were all taken, so I resorted to my second favorite one-liner line from the movie: When Steve Hanson tells the ref he's listening to the anthem. Yes, I did leave a word out of the quotation when I typed it up for the URL. That was intentional.
*Not a debatable point.
**Even less of a debatable point
*Not a debatable point.
**Even less of a debatable point
Welcome to My Blog!
Welcome! This is my first blog ever, and to be honest, I'm not much of a writer, so you probably shouldn't expect any literary brilliance here. Also, I should probably begin by apologizing for the title of this blog, but the truth is, it is one of the greatest hockey quotes out there (the Herb Brooks speech is too long to be a title). But yes, I know there are already a million "Puttin' on the Foil" hockey blogs around.
So what sort of stuff can be expected on this blog? Well, mostly news or thoughts about the Sharks, but don't be surprised to see my thoughts on some of the other happenings around the league. And, since hockey doesn't actually last all year long, this blog may have to turn to baseball for the few months of the offseason.
I've only been following the Sharks since about the end of the 08-09 season (yeah, I know, great time to start watching), but at least that meant I have a thoroughly solidified foundation for hating the Ducks. Mind you, I've only been a serious Sharks fan since about the middle of last season. Maybe around November of that season (09-10). And I've only been an absolutely crazy fan since about January of 09-10. Maybe keep that in mind- through this blog it will probably become increasingly obvious that I don't know too much of the history of the team.
Anyways, with all that in mind, here goes the blog! And, as always,
Go Sharks
So what sort of stuff can be expected on this blog? Well, mostly news or thoughts about the Sharks, but don't be surprised to see my thoughts on some of the other happenings around the league. And, since hockey doesn't actually last all year long, this blog may have to turn to baseball for the few months of the offseason.
I've only been following the Sharks since about the end of the 08-09 season (yeah, I know, great time to start watching), but at least that meant I have a thoroughly solidified foundation for hating the Ducks. Mind you, I've only been a serious Sharks fan since about the middle of last season. Maybe around November of that season (09-10). And I've only been an absolutely crazy fan since about January of 09-10. Maybe keep that in mind- through this blog it will probably become increasingly obvious that I don't know too much of the history of the team.
Anyways, with all that in mind, here goes the blog! And, as always,
Go Sharks
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)