Why is it that goalies in the NHL can be pulled... (1 Viewer)

[Sweet Love]

I have played hockey for the past 30 years (as a kid, in college and play in a beer league now). It was pretty common (and happens in the NHL) where goalies that are having a bad night, get yanked and get to restart the next game without much notice. I realize that in the NHL they play 82 games and in the NFL, they play 16, so the impact is greater (it would be like pulling a goalie for 5 games as the equivalent for one NFL game), but I just don't see why it is such earth-shattering news, not only from the fans perspective (which I get), but internally. Both are the "generals" of their sport. In hockey, the goalie sees the whole sheet of ice and typically between periods when discussing strategy, the coach provides his input and turns it over to the goalie (I am assuming the same does happen too in the NFL).

Where I get lost in all of this, is that QBs have bad games, yet it is assumed you have to let them ride it out. Why? Their confidence? I doubt it is a confidence boost when an NHL first stringer gets shelled for 5 goals in the first period, and gets pulled for someone who is a lesser player. But it is done because (1) you always want to try to salvage the game, (2) everyone has off nights and (3) it gives the rest of the team a boost that "we better support this guy better than we did our starter. Maybe it is just woven into the cultural fabric of the NFL, that this is not done, therefore you should not do it (regardless of what knowledge dictates). It becomes a house of cards due to the fact that it is not accepted. When a QB is pulled, he is lost mentally, because unless you are a Trent Edwards-type, this does not happen, therefore it becomes a bigger deal than it really is.

I have no problem what Shanny did. i thought the back-peddling on reasons was lame, but what if Grossman is not the better QB, but is better than McNabb in the 2 minute drill (this certainy is up for debate)? Do you actualy keep a guy on the bench and not get the best QB play you can due to hurt feelings?

I am curious as to what people think about this. My guess is that maybe it is not done because the QB handles the ball so much and it is hard for the players to adjust mid-way through a game (although they adjust every practice when the QB2 jumps in for first team reps). I also think the culture of the league dicates the fact that you go with your clear starter regardless. Not sure what it could be...

 

[Black]

Goalies don't usually get pulled for Rex Grossman or David Carr.

 

[two_dollars]

Do you pinch hit for your clean up man if he is 0 for 4 for the night?

But you do pull your ace if he has given up 10 runs in 4 innings..

What I mean is it's sport dependent, and doesn't translate across different pro sports, and as I showed, even in the same sport.

 

[Koya]

A few reasons pop to mind without giving it too much thought.

More important than the other players adjusting is the fact that the #2 QB has so many fewer reps than the starter during practice, its much harder to just step in, get up to game speed, understand the intricacies of the game plan and execute it. For a goalie there is not nearly as much thinking/strategy/study involved so if one guy is having an off night, slide the other in and play.

Secondly, the talent between a starting QB and the #2 guy is often tremendous. In Hockey you have some truly elite goalies, but on many teams there is debate as to who should start, even if the starter is a very good player and respected vet. In football, unless you are talking about two young guys who havent made it, a couple journeyman battling for a spot or an older aging player, there usually is a large disparity between #1 and #2.

Third, we are talking about a 16 game season. Each and every game is so important. I think in Hockey, if one guy is struggling, isnt it often the case that that game is already essentially out of hand? I mean, if it's 4-0 early in the second, why not rest your top guy as you have such a slim chance to win anyway? In football, you cant afford to give up on a game, and rest is not as important (although you can make a case to prevent injury and in a huge blowout you will see that happen).

I think AZ is a good example of this as they have a young unproven struggling rookie and a journeyman vet. Neither is entrenched nor much better than the other and changes have been made during a game this year. But if it were Kurt Warner, how bad would it have to get before you yank him for Max Hall?

 

[BobbyLayne]

There is no shortage of history to consult, and coaches are well aware of that.

Think about all the times a QB controversy has pulled a team and/or fan base apart. What benefit is there to a team to go through that? Rarely does a team come out the other side better off for going through it.

Not germane to the McNabb discussion, as Grossman is never going to be a starting QB, but perhaps explains the mentality of coaches that has evolved over the years.

 

[Sweet Love]

Do you pinch hit for your clean up man if he is 0 for 4 for the night?But you do pull your ace if he has given up 10 runs in 4 innings..What I mean is it's sport dependent, and doesn't translate across different pro sports, and as I showed, even in the same sport.

I definitely see your point about how a particular sport dictates what you do (i.e. even in football they rotate backs). In your example, the reason you do not pull a cleanup hitter is due to the fact that batting is driven by the law of averages (you are betting on the fact that your 300 hitter will even out with this next at bat). Is that the same way a QB is looked at (i.e. Rivers threw 2 INTs already, no way he throws a third without getting a TD first)? Honestly, this may be the answer, I am just asking.

 

[HF21]

If the team in front of him isn't playing well, the coach might save the goalie. It's like saying "the team isn't helping you out, so I'll save you from getting shelled." They put the backup in to take the pressure off the starter.

Other times the starter having a bad game so he needs to be pulled. They play 82 games a season. There will be highs and lows - hot streaks and cold streaks.

 

[Sweet Love]

There is no shortage of history to consult, and coaches are well aware of that.

Think about all the times a QB controversy has pulled a team and/or fan base apart. What benefit is there to a team to go through that? Rarely does a team come out the other side better off for going through it.

Not germane to the McNabb discussion, as Grossman is never going to be a starting QB, but perhaps explains the mentality of coaches that has evolved over the years.

I guess this plays into the "cultural" aspect I was discussing. Because it is not done on a regular basis unless something is really wrong (hence the controversy starts), but what if you had a guy like Vick and a guy like Warner on the same team? Two vastly different skillsets and we all know there are teams that have defenses that excel against the pass and/or the run. If you are going against the #1 run defense, yet their CBs leave alot to be desired, then playing Warner makes sense. On the flipside, if you are facing a team with excellent coverage DBs and weaker LBs, i would say that Vick "may" give you a better chance to win. Sure, that is a perfect storm of QBs, but look no further than Denver. If Tebow were in year 2 and Orton was struggling against the blitz, it is just silly to leave him out there. A Tebow-like QB could keep teams honest and now the Defense is left scrambling re-game planning (in the midddle of the game). Sure as a FF nut, this would drive me nuts, but it just screams out to me as the right thing to do.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I have played hockey for the past 30 years (as a kid, in college and play in a beer league now). It was pretty common (and happens in the NHL) where goalies that are having a bad night, get yanked and get to restart the next game without much notice. I realize that in the NHL they play 82 games and in the NFL, they play 16, so the impact is greater (it would be like pulling a goalie for 5 games as the equivalent for one NFL game), but I just don't see why it is such earth-shattering news, not only from the fans perspective (which I get), but internally. Both are the "generals" of their sport. In hockey, the goalie sees the whole sheet of ice and typically between periods when discussing strategy, the coach provides his input and turns it over to the goalie (I am assuming the same does happen too in the NFL).Where I get lost in all of this, is that QBs have bad games, yet it is assumed you have to let them ride it out. Why? Their confidence? I doubt it is a confidence boost when an NHL first stringer gets shelled for 5 goals in the first period, and gets pulled for someone who is a lesser player. But it is done because (1) you always want to try to salvage the game, (2) everyone has off nights and (3) it gives the rest of the team a boost that "we better support this guy better than we did our starter. Maybe it is just woven into the cultural fabric of the NFL, that this is not done, therefore you should not do it (regardless of what knowledge dictates). It becomes a house of cards due to the fact that it is not accepted. When a QB is pulled, he is lost mentally, because unless you are a Trent Edwards-type, this does not happen, therefore it becomes a bigger deal than it really is. I have no problem what Shanny did. i thought the back-peddling on reasons was lame, but what if Grossman is not the better QB, but is better than McNabb in the 2 minute drill (this certainy is up for debate)? Do you actualy keep a guy on the bench and not get the best QB play you can due to hurt feelings?I am curious as to what people think about this. My guess is that maybe it is not done because the QB handles the ball so much and it is hard for the players to adjust mid-way through a game (although they adjust every practice when the QB2 jumps in for first team reps). I also think the culture of the league dicates the fact that you go with your clear starter regardless. Not sure what it could be...

You raise a good point, but the simple answer is "it's different".In hockey you also start your backup goal-tender some games and depending on the differences in talent level in some cases close to 40% of the time.

 

[dhockster]

I think goalies generally get pulled when they give up a lot of goals in a short period of time. Usually this happens in the first two periods. Generally,

most games that a goalie gets pulled, the game is already out of reach for the team pulling the goalie.

With all that said, if the McNabb situation happened during a hockey game, where the team was down by one score late in the game, most hockey coaches

wouldn't pull their goalie in that situation.

Personally, I don't think Shanahan pulled McNabb because he thought Grossman gave them a better chance to win that game. I think he pulled McNabb because McNabb had not been practicing the way he liked, and he was going to show McNabb who was running the team. Because McNabb was having a bad game, that gave Shanahan the cover (in his own mind) to do this. At least, if reports are true, Grossman was going to run the two minute offense the way Shanahan wanted. I think whether it was successful or not was largely irrelevent to Shanahan.

 

[vandyt]

The simplest explanation is no one cares about hockey.

If 50 million people knew who Martin Brodeur was, and thought the game he was being pulled from was meaningful, it would be a big deal.

For the 43 people watching the Devils/Rangers game on Versus, for the rest of the sports world and its viewers, no one cares.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

If you pull your goalie at the end of a close game, you'll definitely hear about it if he lets in a soft goal on the first shot.

Pulling a goalie is like putting in a backup in a 38-3 game. It happens all the time.

 

[footballnerd]

Is your name really Tarvaris Jackson?

 

[ffldrew]

And sometimes you leave him in to long to embarrass him, finally pull him and then trade him away 4 days later without thinking. Sometimes that goalie can go on to win two more Stanley Cups and become the all time win leader as a goalie.

 

[TommyGilmore]

The NFL equivalent would be pulling your safety for an extra pass rusher.

 

[Hue G]

And sometimes you leave him in to long to embarrass him, finally pull him and then trade him away 4 days later without thinking. Sometimes that goalie can go on to win two more Stanley Cups and become the all time win leader as a goalie.

That's awesome!

 

[Da Guru]

I think goalies generally get pulled when they give up a lot of goals in a short period of time. Usually this happens in the first two periods. Generally,most games that a goalie gets pulled, the game is already out of reach for the team pulling the goalie.With all that said, if the McNabb situation happened during a hockey game, where the team was down by one score late in the game, most hockey coacheswouldn't pull their goalie in that situation.Personally, I don't think Shanahan pulled McNabb because he thought Grossman gave them a better chance to win that game. I think he pulled McNabb because McNabb had not been practicing the way he liked, and he was going to show McNabb who was running the team. Because McNabb was having a bad game, that gave Shanahan the cover (in his own mind) to do this. At least, if reports are true, Grossman was going to run the two minute offense the way Shanahan wanted. I think whether it was successful or not was largely irrelevent to Shanahan.

TO backed Shanny..saying McNabb is horrible in the two minute offense.

 

[pollardsvision]

I don't watch hockey, but would they really pull established veteran goalie, who had the 3rd highest winning % of all active goalies and 5 conference title games, at the end of a close game for a guy who stunk and had only seen live action once (very briefly) over the past season and a half?

If that happens with any sort of regularity, then I regret my decision to not watch hockey even less. (Just like Sunday reaffirmed my long standing rule to avoid watching the Redskins at all cost).

 

[Road Warriors]

I have played hockey for the past 30 years (as a kid, in college and play in a beer league now). It was pretty common (and happens in the NHL) where goalies that are having a bad night, get yanked and get to restart the next game without much notice. I realize that in the NHL they play 82 games and in the NFL, they play 16, so the impact is greater (it would be like pulling a goalie for 5 games as the equivalent for one NFL game), but I just don't see why it is such earth-shattering news, not only from the fans perspective (which I get), but internally. Both are the "generals" of their sport. In hockey, the goalie sees the whole sheet of ice and typically between periods when discussing strategy, the coach provides his input and turns it over to the goalie (I am assuming the same does happen too in the NFL).Where I get lost in all of this, is that QBs have bad games, yet it is assumed you have to let them ride it out. Why? Their confidence? I doubt it is a confidence boost when an NHL first stringer gets shelled for 5 goals in the first period, and gets pulled for someone who is a lesser player. But it is done because (1) you always want to try to salvage the game, (2) everyone has off nights and (3) it gives the rest of the team a boost that "we better support this guy better than we did our starter. Maybe it is just woven into the cultural fabric of the NFL, that this is not done, therefore you should not do it (regardless of what knowledge dictates). It becomes a house of cards due to the fact that it is not accepted. When a QB is pulled, he is lost mentally, because unless you are a Trent Edwards-type, this does not happen, therefore it becomes a bigger deal than it really is. I have no problem what Shanny did. i thought the back-peddling on reasons was lame, but what if Grossman is not the better QB, but is better than McNabb in the 2 minute drill (this certainy is up for debate)? Do you actualy keep a guy on the bench and not get the best QB play you can due to hurt feelings?I am curious as to what people think about this. My guess is that maybe it is not done because the QB handles the ball so much and it is hard for the players to adjust mid-way through a game (although they adjust every practice when the QB2 jumps in for first team reps). I also think the culture of the league dicates the fact that you go with your clear starter regardless. Not sure what it could be...

I think it has to do with the position of QB and Goalie on their respective teams. The QB is generally considered to be the leader of the offense, both on the field and in the locker room. He is the one expected to rally the troops, make those around them better, etc. Its as much a leadership role as it is an execution role.The goalie is, pardon the analogy, the kicker of a hockey team. Hear me out...The goalie in hockey is generally a lone wolf type. Its rare that a goalie is a team leader, on the ice or in the locker room. While a hot goalie can carry a team, and the position may be the single most important one on the ice, he can individually take over a game without directly impacting the players around him. While the other 5 guys have to work together to be successful on the ice, the goalie ( like the K ) has a more individual role. My $.02

 

[CalBear]

I think the real reason is that your backup goalie is likely to be able to perform at a level similar to your starting goalie, while your backup QB is likely to be Rex Grossman.

 

[Tau837]

I think goalies generally get pulled when they give up a lot of goals in a short period of time. Usually this happens in the first two periods. Generally,most games that a goalie gets pulled, the game is already out of reach for the team pulling the goalie.With all that said, if the McNabb situation happened during a hockey game, where the team was down by one score late in the game, most hockey coacheswouldn't pull their goalie in that situation.Personally, I don't think Shanahan pulled McNabb because he thought Grossman gave them a better chance to win that game. I think he pulled McNabb because McNabb had not been practicing the way he liked, and he was going to show McNabb who was running the team. Because McNabb was having a bad game, that gave Shanahan the cover (in his own mind) to do this. At least, if reports are true, Grossman was going to run the two minute offense the way Shanahan wanted. I think whether it was successful or not was largely irrelevent to Shanahan.

Surprised it took 10 posts for someone to give the reason in the first two paragraphs. It's obviously a bad analogy to what Shanahan did in pulling McNabb.To go further, the positions compared here are also apples and oranges. The goalie is more analogous to a football team's defense. The quarterback comparable in hockey would typically be the best goal scorer on the team. If the Pittsburgh Penguins get off to a bad start and are down by 2+ goals, do they consider pulling Sidney Crosby? No, if there is any hope of coming back, they need him in the game scoring or creating goals. And that's what would be analogous to pulling McNabb.

 

[habsfan]

Both are the "generals" of their sport. In hockey, the goalie sees the whole sheet of ice and typically between periods when discussing strategy, the coach provides his input and turns it over to the goalie (I am assuming the same does happen too in the NFL).

I am a goalie and when younger played at a pretty high level. None of this stuff is true. Goalies are the place kickers of hockey. We sit alone at the front of the bus and go about our business. Don't talk to (most of) us on game days unless it's in the game to communicate an assigment. We're wired a bit differently than everyone else.

 

[RUSF18]

Do you pinch hit for your clean up man if he is 0 for 4 for the night?But you do pull your ace if he has given up 10 runs in 4 innings..What I mean is it's sport dependent, and doesn't translate across different pro sports, and as I showed, even in the same sport.

Exactly. Not sure why other "theories" have been presented after this one.

 

[username]

How many goalies have a captains patch sewed onto the chest of their jersey?

 

[habsfan]

How many goalies have a captains patch sewed onto the chest of their jersey?

Roberto Luongo did last season but gave it up this year (not that it's relevant to the comparison).

 

[Sweet Love]

Both are the "generals" of their sport. In hockey, the goalie sees the whole sheet of ice and typically between periods when discussing strategy, the coach provides his input and turns it over to the goalie (I am assuming the same does happen too in the NFL).

I am a goalie and when younger played at a pretty high level. None of this stuff is true. Goalies are the place kickers of hockey. We sit alone at the front of the bus and go about our business. Don't talk to (most of) us on game days unless it's in the game to communicate an assigment. We're wired a bit differently than everyone else.

I know you are a goalie, but I couldn't disagree more. We always consulted with our goalie in both HS and college as to what he was seeing, because he had the best seat in the house. While the analogy may be different, I am still not seeing why a guy making 6 million per year cannot sit for a while, if startegy dicates it is the better move.

 

[Sweet Love]

I think the real reason is that your backup goalie is likely to be able to perform at a level similar to your starting goalie, while your backup QB is likely to be Rex Grossman.

In that particular case it is...how do you explain Kolb versus Vick, Anderson versus Hall, Gradkowski versus Campbell....

 

[RUSF18]

How many goalies have a captains patch sewed onto the chest of their jersey?

Roberto Luongo did last season but gave it up this year (not that it's relevant to the comparison).

He was a captain, but didn't wear the C. Against NHL rules for goalies to wear it.

 

[mbuehner]

I think the answer is- quarterbacks get pulled all the time, for many of the same reasons. If you think you need to protect your guys psyche or light a fire on him, you pull him. On the other hand you don't pull Marty Brodeur very often because its not a useful tool for a guy on that level.

The other thing is there are 82 regular season NHL games and 16 NFL games. I bet if you looked the rate of QBs and goallies getting pulled isn't all that different weighted for the number of games played, even though each individual NFL game is MUCH more important than a hockey game.

 

[smitty63]

And sometimes you leave him in to long to embarrass him, finally pull him and then trade him away 4 days later without thinking. Sometimes that goalie can go on to win two more Stanley Cups and become the all time win leader as a goalie.

You mean the one that has since been overtaken by the aforementioned Martin Brodeur?

 

[CalBear]

I think the real reason is that your backup goalie is likely to be able to perform at a level similar to your starting goalie, while your backup QB is likely to be Rex Grossman.

In that particular case it is...how do you explain Kolb versus Vick, Anderson versus Hall, Gradkowski versus Campbell....

Didn't Hall just get pulled for Anderson, some time after Anderson got pulled for Hall? Where the QBs are of similar skill levels, a QB who's not doing well does get pulled. But the QBs are not normally of similar skill levels.

 

[Sweet Love]

Both are the "generals" of their sport. In hockey, the goalie sees the whole sheet of ice and typically between periods when discussing strategy, the coach provides his input and turns it over to the goalie (I am assuming the same does happen too in the NFL).

I am a goalie and when younger played at a pretty high level. None of this stuff is true. Goalies are the place kickers of hockey. We sit alone at the front of the bus and go about our business. Don't talk to (most of) us on game days unless it's in the game to communicate an assigment. We're wired a bit differently than everyone else.

Not that this is the meant to be the central theme of the post, but what is the percentage of place kickers in the HOF versus that of goalies? You are slling yourself short as a former goalie. Just because the defensemen thought it would be funny if they aimed for your head during "tip-in" drills, doesn't make you less of an integral part of the team.

 

[az_prof]

Personally, I think it is stupid. Partly, I suspect it has to do with football pretending that it is War. And so the QB is the "onfield General" and you "don't replace your general in the middle of a war."

Football is not war. And even in war you replace the General if he isn't getting the job done! Or, you use more than one general depending on the type of war you are fighting. So, I think the analogy is a bit stretched and even if it were legitimate, the point is being exaggerated.

 

[This_Guy]

Goalies are much more interchangeable than QBs. Teams build their entire offense around the strengths of their starting QB. The starting QB spends hundreds of hours working with the WRs to get timing and reads down. So they know they are on the same page and reacting to situations as the other would expect. After being in a game a starting QB gains a bunch of knowledge about how the defense plays. This knowledge isn't the same as what you learn sitting and watching the game. All these factors make it a major downgrade to a back-up QB for an in-game situation. I know this is oversimplifying it but a goalie stops pucks. Bring a new guy in mid game and he can pretty much stop pucks as good as he could if he was the regular starter.

 

[habsfan]

Both are the "generals" of their sport. In hockey, the goalie sees the whole sheet of ice and typically between periods when discussing strategy, the coach provides his input and turns it over to the goalie (I am assuming the same does happen too in the NFL).

I am a goalie and when younger played at a pretty high level. None of this stuff is true. Goalies are the place kickers of hockey. We sit alone at the front of the bus and go about our business. Don't talk to (most of) us on game days unless it's in the game to communicate an assigment. We're wired a bit differently than everyone else.

Not that this is the meant to be the central theme of the post, but what is the percentage of place kickers in the HOF versus that of goalies? You are slling yourself short as a former goalie. Just because the defensemen thought it would be funny if they aimed for your head during "tip-in" drills, doesn't make you less of an integral part of the team.

I never meant to imply that goalies aren't an integral position on a hockey team. I meant that the game doesn't flow through a goalie like it does through a QB. I'm not calling plays or doing anything that resembles acting as a "field general" apart from barking at a defensemen if he doesn't see someone coming. My dependancy on others to stop pucks is limited. My preparation has nothing to do with game plans or plays or specifics of my opponents (typically).

 

[QuizGuy66]

And sometimes you leave him in to long to embarrass him, finally pull him and then trade him away 4 days later without thinking. Sometimes that goalie can go on to win two more Stanley Cups and become the all time win leader as a goalie when he retired and then he'll get passed by a better goalie.

Fixed

In answer to the question in the subject header. The reason is that they don't use goalie in the NFL

-QG

 

[THE FANTASY KING]

I believe the correct answer is that nobody cares about hockey.

Regards,

THE FANTASY KING

 

[QuizGuy66]

As a more serious answer, there are a number of factors:

1) Goalies are almost never pulled when there is a one-goal difference late in a game. That would be rather significant. Usually when a goalie is pulled either the game is out of hand or the team is looking like total crapola and the coach wants to give them a spark (even if the deficit isn't particularly the fault of the goalie). The McNabb analogy isn't really apt here IMO. That'd be like a playoff game going to overtime and then a coach deciding to switch goalies because the backup goalie has a better record in playoff overtime in his career. It'd be viewed as a total move.

2) The shorter season definitely matters more. As a percentage of the season, each football game translates into about 5 hockey games. There are more chances for a goalie to get his confidence back.

3) Goalie switching frequently does bring about controversy and generally in the playoffs continually switching up the goalies and going with the "hot hand" is usually (and I'm saying usually) not considered the optimum strategy. In this regard it can be disruptive. With a starting QB switch the ramifications are siilary. But back to the goalie conversation: Even if the switch happens in an out of control game in hockey, it'd be a bigger deal if that back-up got the next start (esp. against a key opponent).

4) The goalie's job is very different than the QBs - in hockey it's probably more important in terms of the team's winning/losing but in terms of the effect that a player has on his fellow teammates, the QB is more impactful. Changing goalies has zero effect on things like the defensive pairings, offensive pairings or team approach - these things might change but it's independent of who the goalie is. Change the QB though and other factors almost always come in - is his arm weaker (see Kitna compared to Palmer in '05 for one example or Pennington compared to a host of people), is he more mobile (such as Vick compared to Kobb), does he favor different receivers, perhaps the guys who are 3rd or 4th normally but that he works with more in practice, how well does he know the playbook, can he play fake. The only things that change with a goalie might be where the oppostion chooses to shoot and perhaps his ability to handle the puck - oftentimes it's just a straight overall skill difference. But again, more important is that it's less impactful on his fellow players.

So there you go

-QG

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Do you pinch hit for your clean up man if he is 0 for 4 for the night?But you do pull your ace if he has given up 10 runs in 4 innings..What I mean is it's sport dependent, and doesn't translate across different pro sports, and as I showed, even in the same sport.

Exactly. Not sure why other "theories" have been presented after this one.

Why would people stop posting theories after one bad one?Batters have too small a sample size to see if they're playing really poorly. Further, an out is the statistically expected result in baseball. Getting thrown out 3 times and throwing 3 interceptions or giving up 3 runs are in no way comparable.In general, football fans are big babies. Anything that can be construed as hurting a players poor wittle feelings is always going to be talked to death about. Think about it, how many times a week on this board do people talk about what kind of message something sends to a player, or things like that? People talk about these guys like they're teeball players. No you can't pull Johnny just because you think it will help you win, it will hurt his feelings.These are grown men getting paid millions of dollars, they can handle someone telling them that they're having a bad night. And if they can't, then get rid of them.

 

[Jayrod]

I believe the correct answer is that nobody cares about hockey.Regards,THE FANTASY KING

Damn this guy is good!

 

[QuizGuy66]

I never meant to imply that goalies aren't an integral position on a hockey team. I meant that the game doesn't flow through a goalie like it does through a QB. I'm not calling plays or doing anything that resembles acting as a "field general" apart from barking at a defensemen if he doesn't see someone coming. My dependancy on others to stop pucks is limited. My preparation has nothing to do with game plans or plays or specifics of my opponents (typically).

Much more succinct than my post as well.Though I'll guiltily admit that I also wanted to give habsfan props for a top-of-the-line avatar -QG

 

[thatguy]

And sometimes you leave him in to long to embarrass him, finally pull him and then trade him away 4 days later without thinking. Sometimes that goalie can go on to win two more Stanley Cups and become the all time win leader as a goalie.

Awesome. Off topic, yes, but still awesome. The Avs were so effin good those first 6 or so years... :endhijack:

 

[The Carnage]

In the early seventies the Redskins did this on a regular basis. Billy Kilmer for most of the game and Sonny Jurgensen for the two minute drill, either at the end of the game or each half. So Shanny wasn't without precedent, even for the Redskins in particular.