GDB XXVIII: The Wings and Schwarzenegger references

bingofuel
December 03 2009 03:25PM

When was the last time the Oilers played? Like a week ago? And while some of you might remember what the score was, I actually took a page from Minister Towel Boy's lexicon of pop culture references and paid a little visit to my favourite fictional memory wipe shop, Rekall Inc.

Not only did I get a Mars adventure with a triple-breasted prostitute implanted into my brain, but I also had the fine people at the ol' Brain Deflator Factory pull the 7-2 loss to the Canucks out of my brain.

Shit, It didn't work. DAMN YOU COHAGGEN!

Give these people air

Anyone sitting there thinking this team is done for the season is... well, maybe not too far off. My older brother, a PhD in theoretical mathematics declared a few days back that, "Even though it is only December, the Oilers are pretty much toast and will not make the playoffs. They need to play at a 110 pt pace for the rest of the year (or something like that) just to make it. It is over for them for this year."

We put this out to our lovely Twitter followers the other day, and were treated to a further tidbit from oil101:

"If they get 6 pts every 5 games (98 pt pace) they will end up with 90 pts. Last two years cutoff was at 91 pts."

SEE EVERYONE?! THERE'S STILL A CHANCE!

Wings of, hopefully, providence

'Tis the season for miracles, my friends. So I'm gonna have a sit on ol' Brownleeclaus' lap, ask for a Tonka truck for Christmas... then I'll ask him to slip performance-enhancing drugs into the Oilers' gatorade. I'm surprised Kay-Z hasn't thought of this already. Ah, but he's too busy hiring consultants and trying to get taxpayers to fund an arena.

So tonight we have to go it alone against the Detroit Red Wings. Sure, they're ranked 10th in western conference while the Oilers are dead last... but we still have a chance. And even if we lose tonight (which we won't) we can rest easy knowing we're still a full THREE POINTS ahead of the Maple Leafs. Am I right, guys? Guys?

*crickets chirp*

Hulk smash!

No one likes losing, and you can bet your ass that every last one of the boys on this squad would probably break their sticks in a rage over their performance for far this season — as long as it didn't severely injury their own goalie. Khabby's in rough shape as it is.

But broken sticks don't win games. Hustling, battling, scoring and defending your zone wins games. These guys are tired of being raked over the coals, I'm sure. Tonight they're going to do all the things they need to do to win... and they're going to — get this — actually win it.

I said earlier today I thought the Wings would take the game 4-2. I take all that back. Tonight, it's the Oilers. 4-2.

Book it.

Go Oilers!

243fa199ff6efc362bf29a17e950b47e
Bingofuel is the handsome cyborg who pulls all the levers behind the curtains of the OilersNation. When he isn't running the site, he's plugged into a wall socket, recharging. Or Brownlee and Wanye are playing "keep away" with him. He gets little to no respect.
Avatar
#101 Jason Gregor
December 03 2009, 10:00PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

""The vendetta ended when it became clear the papers were considering cutting reporters due to lack of interest in the team. Before the loss of Gretz, it seemed like there were three or four media guys per paper and guys from all the tv stations followed the team about. The sports sections were being cut when papers were actually still making money.

One who lived through it and learned sports reporters and atheletes aren't dispassionate heroes, they're as vain, foolish, and money hungry as anybody else."""

Barry your memory is very unique...You know why fans came back? Because the team almost left. Not because the media kissed ass. Is it the media's job to tell the fans, "Come support the team. They are great".

No!!! Tell them the facts. The team was sucking, the owner had sold off all of the star players. The media didn't sell/trade them all away.

If you want to have a soapbox, stand on one that is accurate.

Jim Matheson was the beat guy for the Journal and Dick Chubey for the Sun. Each had a junior beat guy under them. Brownlee that guy for the Journal and Dan Barnes was the junior guy at the Sun.

Each paper had a columnist, Cam Cole at the Journal and Terry Jonesy at the Sun.

And when they were brutal in the mid-90's...the Journal had Matheson, then Spector as the junior and Brownlee when he wasn't doing boxing and baseball, was actually writing report cards on each game. And Cole was still the columnist.

So, in fact there was MORE coverage when they were brutal. So tell me again how the reporters hurt the team?

It would seem you are the foolish one.

Avatar
#102 Eddie Shore
December 03 2009, 11:02PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
BarryS wrote:

In my day, if daddy wasn't rich and you didn't own wheels, the girls would not come close enough to see it with a telescope.

In "your day" were there computers? You talk as if you are as old as dust. Your rambling posts are starting to mirror those of the infamous Deep Oil.

Avatar
#103 -30-
December 04 2009, 06:39AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

The media didn't kill interest in hockey, they killed the CFL or helped kill it.

For years Edmonton Journal readers were treated to sports columnist Marc Horton bashing the CFL. Pretty soon it was everyone pile on the wagon and bash Canadian football.

That couldn't be said for the NHL in Canada.

The worst thing the media do when covering sports here is lob softball questions to athletes and management. Can you blame them? You have to travel with these guys for a good part of the years.

Cam Cole was the one guy who had the balls to call it like he saw it. Does anybody remember how incensed he got Eskimos middle linebacker Dan Kepley at him? That's real reporting. Cole called it the way he saw it even though he expected a rough ride from what he wrote.

I'd love to see more of that here. Not adversarial reporting but reporters who ask the tough questions of Oiler management and players.

-30-

Avatar
#104 Robin Brownlee
December 04 2009, 07:11AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@-30-

Tough questions get asked all the time. Getting an answer is a different matter, and you should know this.

If a reporter asks tough questions and doesn't get answers, it limits what gets written in a straight news story or a game report, where room for opinion is minimal.

If a columnist like Cole asks the same questions and doesn't get what he wants, he has the latitude to inject his opinion and say what the coach/player/manager wouldn't. Big difference.

Avatar
#105 BarryS
December 04 2009, 10:04AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Eddie Shore wrote:

In "your day" were there computers? You talk as if you are as old as dust. Your rambling posts are starting to mirror those of the infamous Deep Oil.

Actually, when I was in school computers took four or five floors of their own buildings. One of my jobs along the way was to buy desktop computers for the governement with 2 megs of ram and two floppy drives, one for word perfect or whatever, one to save the data on. They cost in the neighbourhood of 49,000.00 each.

My first personal computer, after the sinclair and the Certified data, 4 mbs ram, two four mbs hard dives, cost like 4000.00 bucks.

As for old, I can vaguely remember watching Rocket Richard play during the second and third periods of HNIC in snowy black and white. I also was old enough to go to Woodstock if we had actually heard about it in Edmonton before the movie came out.

Edit: I was also old enough to laugh at the stories of guys in Toronto who had to explain to their wives who the good looking women they saw them on television holding hands with in the stands.

Also, no need to get insulting. Deepoil had axes to grind, I only partake in the arguments going on and make to claim to being right and unchallengable.

Avatar
#106 BarryS
December 04 2009, 10:10AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
RossCreekNation wrote:

Heard a bit of Stauff & Karius (an upgrade if you ask me). WTF?! The Oil can't even lose right. Losers. And by losers, I mean winners. And by winners, I mean LOSERS (lol).

What's Barry S' deal? Or should I say bsaipe? Hmmm... could it be? Barry S + bsaipe. Hm. Nope, I can't figure this one out. (Seriously though dude, what's the deal with the name? I've noticed it once or twice in the past, but assumed human error. It's not possible for a human to error this long though... is it - I'm looking at you "Total Goals" Bob Nilsson).

Well it depends which side of the brain is in charge on the day. Hey, just because I was around when computers cost tens of millions of dollars and some IBM guy said desktop computers would never work, means sometimes my brain works like a sinclar computer, not very well.

Avatar
#107 BarryS
December 04 2009, 10:23AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Jason Gregor wrote:

""The vendetta ended when it became clear the papers were considering cutting reporters due to lack of interest in the team. Before the loss of Gretz, it seemed like there were three or four media guys per paper and guys from all the tv stations followed the team about. The sports sections were being cut when papers were actually still making money.

One who lived through it and learned sports reporters and atheletes aren't dispassionate heroes, they're as vain, foolish, and money hungry as anybody else."""

Barry your memory is very unique...You know why fans came back? Because the team almost left. Not because the media kissed ass. Is it the media's job to tell the fans, "Come support the team. They are great".

No!!! Tell them the facts. The team was sucking, the owner had sold off all of the star players. The media didn't sell/trade them all away.

If you want to have a soapbox, stand on one that is accurate.

Jim Matheson was the beat guy for the Journal and Dick Chubey for the Sun. Each had a junior beat guy under them. Brownlee that guy for the Journal and Dan Barnes was the junior guy at the Sun.

Each paper had a columnist, Cam Cole at the Journal and Terry Jonesy at the Sun.

And when they were brutal in the mid-90's...the Journal had Matheson, then Spector as the junior and Brownlee when he wasn't doing boxing and baseball, was actually writing report cards on each game. And Cole was still the columnist.

So, in fact there was MORE coverage when they were brutal. So tell me again how the reporters hurt the team?

It would seem you are the foolish one.

Was a season ticket holder at the time, don't have to tell me how bad they were. I also know there was hardly a day went but without the name of gretzky being mentioned in an article. Hey, the people next to me at the collisem gave up their tickets and bought a satellite dish so they could still watch Gretz play. They were not alone. And dispite what you say, day after day of only negative coverage will help drive people away. At least today, the negative coverage all the time is limited mostly to blogs.

Did you actually live through the times or is your information second hand? Funny thing, nothing personal, but all those guys have moved on except Jones. Can't blame guys for moving on to better things, only wonder sometimes why, but not often. Hey, I enjoy Brownlee's stuff, didn't for a while at the Journal, but he's a little more mellow now, less strident, if you will.

I know who were the writers and columnists, somewhere around here is Issue One of the Sun.

Yah, the fans came back when Pocklington sold the team and left the city, to cheers not sighs of mourning. The tone of the reporting did change then and it was not because the team was any better.

By definition, soap boxes and accuracy have nothing in common.

As for foolish, can't deny that.

Avatar
#108 Harlie
December 04 2009, 10:25AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@BarryS

Santa?

Avatar
#109 TigerUnderGlass
December 04 2009, 10:26AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Robin Brownlee wrote:

Tough questions get asked all the time. Getting an answer is a different matter, and you should know this.

If a reporter asks tough questions and doesn't get answers, it limits what gets written in a straight news story or a game report, where room for opinion is minimal.

If a columnist like Cole asks the same questions and doesn't get what he wants, he has the latitude to inject his opinion and say what the coach/player/manager wouldn't. Big difference.

This is a good point that can be very easy to forget. I know I forget sometimes when I get frustrated wondering why nobody is asking the obvious. (like when Burke was talking about Heatley, or when he was discussing the Kessel deal)

As fans we want to hear answers to hard questions, but I would suspect that there isn't a reporter in the world that doesn't prefer to ask tough questions.

Avatar
#110 TigerUnderGlass
December 04 2009, 10:32AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@BarryS

Did you actually live through the times or is your information second hand?

How long ago do you think it was? It's not like he's retelling a Vimy Ridge account or something. He's talking about relatively recent history within his own trade.

Avatar
#111 Jason Gregor
December 04 2009, 11:40AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@BarryS

"""Did you actually live through the times or is your information second hand? Funny thing, nothing personal, but all those guys have moved on except Jones. Can't blame guys for moving on to better things, only wonder sometimes why, but not often. Hey, I enjoy Brownlee's stuff, didn't for a while at the Journal, but he's a little more mellow now, less strident, if you will."""

I went to those games and I read the papers daily, so yes I lived through those times.

You way they have moved on...really...Last I checked Dan Barnes and Jim Matheson still work at the Journal.

Spec and Brownlee are still working in Edmonton at different outlets.

The people went away because the team SUCKED. The fans were spoiled with having the most exciting team ever for 12 years...after 92 it ended and the fans, like in many cities stopped supporting them. Do you think if the writers had written, this team works really hard, or they give a great effort that the fans would have stayed. We had season tickets then, me and three buddies, and we loved hockey, but it was painful to watch, yet we went. Had nothing to do with what was written.

Avatar
#112 BarryS
December 04 2009, 01:07PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Harlie

Sorry, fat but not that fat and no red cloths.

Avatar
#113 BarryS
December 04 2009, 01:26PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Jason Gregor wrote:

"""Did you actually live through the times or is your information second hand? Funny thing, nothing personal, but all those guys have moved on except Jones. Can't blame guys for moving on to better things, only wonder sometimes why, but not often. Hey, I enjoy Brownlee's stuff, didn't for a while at the Journal, but he's a little more mellow now, less strident, if you will."""

I went to those games and I read the papers daily, so yes I lived through those times.

You way they have moved on...really...Last I checked Dan Barnes and Jim Matheson still work at the Journal.

Spec and Brownlee are still working in Edmonton at different outlets.

The people went away because the team SUCKED. The fans were spoiled with having the most exciting team ever for 12 years...after 92 it ended and the fans, like in many cities stopped supporting them. Do you think if the writers had written, this team works really hard, or they give a great effort that the fans would have stayed. We had season tickets then, me and three buddies, and we loved hockey, but it was painful to watch, yet we went. Had nothing to do with what was written.

So after Pocklington slunk away and the fans began to come back was because the team was better right? You don't think the press constantly harping on Gretz, Mess and all gone because Pocklington couldn't/wouldn't pay for them by constantly harping on Gretz, Mess and all gone because to be replaced by lessser talents had nothing to do with it?

And the Newsmedia makes money off good news, right? A win sells more papers than a loss? The aftergame radio shows have phones ringing off the hook after a win than after a loss.

We had good players left town because we couldn't pay them and life went on. The stories reported economic realities behind them, lamented the fact and never once mentioned Gretz, Mess and the guys.

Peter Puck has deserved all he has got, did the team of the day disserve to get what they got from the press?

You don't think, given how the press tries to wield its power while at the same time denying it has that power might be a reason the mainstream is slowly sinking in the west like the sun. It won't rise in the east like the sun tomorrow, though.

Avatar
#114 Hemmertime
December 04 2009, 05:31PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@BarryS

I enjoy Brownlee's articles he writes and his opinions, I do not enjoy Brownlee in comments sections though

Avatar
#115 BarryS
December 04 2009, 07:45PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Hemmertime wrote:

I enjoy Brownlee's articles he writes and his opinions, I do not enjoy Brownlee in comments sections though

I agree, and the same to Gregor. Both tend to act in comments section like god gave them the keys to correctness and the rest of us should bow to their superior knowledge and position.

I don't mind their putdowns of direct attacks on them, but attacking posters just because they disagree with them is out of bounds.

This is not the internet version of attack radio, is it?

Avatar
#116 Jason Gregor
December 05 2009, 12:44AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@BarryS

""And the Newsmedia makes money off good news, right? A win sells more papers than a loss? The aftergame radio shows have phones ringing off the hook after a win than after a loss. ""

I honestly wonder if you actually read this site or listen to radio. I hosted the night show for six years, I think I know what prompts more calls, and I can tell you it is loses. Fans are upset, and most guys like to solve problems, so more are likely to call after a loss. The only exception is during the playoffs when a win is even more important.

And yes the team got what it deserved. The team wasn't good, plain and simple.

Avatar
#117 Jason Gregor
December 05 2009, 12:48AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
BarryS wrote:

I agree, and the same to Gregor. Both tend to act in comments section like god gave them the keys to correctness and the rest of us should bow to their superior knowledge and position.

I don't mind their putdowns of direct attacks on them, but attacking posters just because they disagree with them is out of bounds.

This is not the internet version of attack radio, is it?

I actually debate freely with guys who have an opinion based on actual facts.

To allow you to spew incorrect facts time after time, doesn't do the site justice. In fact, someone might read it and interpret is as fact, so it needs to be corrected.

When I'm wrong on facts guys point it out. That is how it works.

When you claim is flat out not true or inaccurate expect me or many of the posters to correct it. You can have an opinion on a player or team or coach and that is fine, but if you want to debate you point with fallacies then expect to be called out on them.

Avatar
#118 cableguy - 2nd Tier Fan
December 05 2009, 08:00AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
BarryS wrote:

I agree, and the same to Gregor. Both tend to act in comments section like god gave them the keys to correctness and the rest of us should bow to their superior knowledge and position.

I don't mind their putdowns of direct attacks on them, but attacking posters just because they disagree with them is out of bounds.

This is not the internet version of attack radio, is it?

Both tend to act in comments section like god gave them the keys to correctness and the rest of us should bow to their superior knowledge and position.

how did you put it earlier? something like:

pot....kettle....black

Avatar
#119 Robin Brownlee
December 05 2009, 08:44AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Hemmertime wrote:

I enjoy Brownlee's articles he writes and his opinions, I do not enjoy Brownlee in comments sections though

I've said it before and I'll say it again. If you don't like how I comment here, first take a look at what I'm responding to. A reader can say, "I think Brownlee is wrong" and he'll get a perfectly reasoned response. There are hundreds of examples of that on this site. They are here in black and white for you and anybody else to see.

People who start out by trying to antagonize and needle, and many do, get it back in spades. Lots of examples of that, too. If they, or you, don't like it, too bad. Don't reply to me or something I've written like I'm a know-nothing dummy and I'll grant you the same courtesy.

As for the comment by BarryS about bowing to our knowledge or position, that's a bogus argument. It isn't about bowing to anyone, but let's be honest here. Readers posting here are, for the most part, FANS. They want the Oilers to win. They expect the Oilers to win. When the Oilers lose, when the Oilers suck, they become not only more critical of the team but about everything surrounding the team -- including the writers who cover the Oilers. It's as predictable as the sun coming up. When the Oilers do well, it's remarkable how we somehow become better, more insightful writers. Good story, Robin. Good story, Gregor. You guys are great. I try to approach what I write about the team the same way all the time because I don't have that emotional investment in them.

The other aspect that feeds into what BarryS said it this: if a reader says it's night and I say it's day, I'm not of the mind to write a half-dozen 500-word entries in the comments section to debate the point. That's for you guys to do. That's especially meaningless when a reader continues to say, "I think . . . ." when I've been told the opposite by people with the team who actually make the decisions etc. In that case, if I say, "You're wrong," it's not a matter of being dismissive or arrogant, or about me being "smarter" than you, it's more often than not a case of me having information you don't.

Given the time we spend around the team -- watching games and practices, doing interviews, hanging around in the dressing room -- I'd better know a thing or two more than the average fan or I'm not doing my job.

Avatar
#120 BarryS
December 05 2009, 10:30AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@cableguy - 2nd Tier Fan

and the colour black. Didn't every deny I wasn't.

Also never claimed my opinion was ever more important than anybody elses.

Avatar
#121 BarryS
December 05 2009, 10:37AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Robin Brownlee

Good response, Robin. I know it must be hard to do your job sometimes given "secret sources" must be kept secret to remain useful. "In my opinion" you are sometimes short with us, but that's only my opinion worth whatever you take it for and nothing else. The Blog is better with you than without you and that is something we all have to remember.

Avatar
#122 BarryS
December 05 2009, 10:50AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I listen all the time. In the matter of the last of the Pocklington years and the first years of EIG, the team was neither better nor worse until the lockout but the attitude of the media diffinately did.

As for your memory as opposed to my memory during those years, what reason can you give your's is better or more important than mine? what proof you are more neutral towards the team than us fans?

Given I rely on being there and my memory of the articles of the time, I hardly claim or can claim those to be facts. Guess what, my training, such as it is, is in the field of history. I understand that those who lived a period of time and the professions in that field often have different views on what went on. Notice I haven't tsken on Brownlee who is both a professional in the field (as you are now) but also worked the field during the time.

He hasn't yet weighed in on this thread nor do I expect him to but I suspect he knows more about that time than either of us.

Avatar
#123 Robin Brownlee
December 05 2009, 11:30AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
BarryS wrote:

Good response, Robin. I know it must be hard to do your job sometimes given "secret sources" must be kept secret to remain useful. "In my opinion" you are sometimes short with us, but that's only my opinion worth whatever you take it for and nothing else. The Blog is better with you than without you and that is something we all have to remember.

That's BS. Bugger off, needle dick.

Avatar
#124 cableguy - 2nd Tier Fan
December 05 2009, 11:33AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Robin Brownlee wrote:

That's BS. Bugger off, needle dick.

i believe it was established earlier to term was "carrot penis"

Avatar
#125 BarryS
December 05 2009, 11:59AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Robin Brownlee

BS That's my initials all right. Haven't gone anyplace to leave from. Don't recall ever showing you mine, nothing much to show off anyway.

So you mean the blog is better without you?

Avatar
#126 BarryS
December 05 2009, 12:06PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
cableguy - 2nd Tier Fan wrote:

i believe it was established earlier to term was "carrot penis"

That was someone else. This is the first time I've been so honoured with a drive by from Brownlee, and on what was supposed to be a word of support, too, some guys just don't like unsolicited compliments I guess.

Comments are closed for this article.