Sport Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 This is the only sport that does this nonsense too. If a baseball player wears #24 nobody accuses them of disrespecting Willie Mays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FGM13 Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 7 minutes ago, McCarthy said: This is the only sport that does this nonsense too. If a baseball player wears #24 nobody accuses them of disrespecting Willie Mays. Well to be fair, the NHL is the league where the superstars wear uncommon numbers (99, 66, 87, 97). But really, who cares? I like that Ho-Sang is wearing 66 just as much as I like him as a player, which is a lot. GO OILERS-GO BLUE JAYS-GO ESKIMOS-GO COLTS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmm Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 25 minutes ago, FGM13 said: Well to be fair, the NHL is the league where the superstars wear uncommon numbers (99, 66, 87, 97). But really, who cares? I like that Ho-Sang is wearing 66 just as much as I like him as a player, which is a lot. I see your point, but a bunch of players have worn 77 without anyone worrying about Ray Bourque or Paul Coffey's legacy. Doug Weight said he wore 93 and Doug Gilmour didn't care. And I don't remember any outrage (maybe there was some, I honestly don't remember) when Liam O'Brien first wore 87 for the Caps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 8 hours ago, 2001mark said: It would merely take another 2-3 players to debut/change to #66 for this to really stop being a thing. That it's one single guy making a debut makes it clickbait. And he's a black Asian Jew who's already known for having an outsize personality. If Gord Lumchuk who gets pucks deep does it, no one cares. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnWis97 Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 The controversy is stupid. As pointed out above, plenty of people wear numbers of other superstars, like 9 and 4. The only thing that sets this apart is that it's an unusual number. That does not make it Lemieux's any more than 9 belongs to Howe. Unless the league wants to retire 66 (and I don't think it should have retired 99), it's available. Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse." BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD POTD (Shared) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Six Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Is this an actual controversy? Every article I've seen just says "some" are angry, but there's nothing resembling an actual quote from anyone who's against this. Is this fake news? Are we just drumming up outrage over an imaginary group of people's outrage? WHO'S ACTUALLY AGAINST THIS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sport Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Brian Lawton was against it on NHL Network a few nights ago, but f*** that guy he wore #98! The controversy, like most bad things in hockey, can be traced back to Penguins fans. I like the kid because he chose to wear #66. That takes guts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Hear me out here: what if he had a number that could honor Mario Lemieux and Wayne Gretzky at the same time? I'm sure by evenly dividing between two beloved legends of the game, no one could possibly find an issue. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kramerica Industries Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 35 minutes ago, the admiral said: Hear me out here: what if he had a number that could honor Mario Lemieux and Wayne Gretzky at the same time? I'm sure by evenly dividing between two beloved legends of the game, no one could possibly find an issue. Are you suggesting Ho-Sang should've chosen the number...69? Nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HedleyLamarr Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 1 hour ago, the admiral said: Hear me out here: what if he had a number that could honor Mario Lemieux and Wayne Gretzky at the same time? I'm sure by evenly dividing between two beloved legends of the game, no one could possibly find an issue. Only if he changes his last name to Jimmylegs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Folks, do not google "Jimmylegs69" ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnWis97 Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 2 hours ago, McCarthy said: Brian Lawton was against it on NHL Network a few nights ago, but f*** that guy he wore #98! The controversy, like most bad things in hockey, can be traced back to Penguins fans. I like the kid because he chose to wear #66. That takes guts. That's hilarious. If I recall, he chose that number because he was going to be almost as good as Gretzky. He eventually was a bust and changed his number to 8. He's not the first person that should be critical of this. Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse." BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD POTD (Shared) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brass Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 3 hours ago, McCarthy said: Brian Lawton was against it on NHL Network a few nights ago, but f*** that guy he wore #98! The controversy, like most bad things in hockey, can be traced back to Penguins fans. I like the kid because he chose to wear #66. That takes guts. Brian Lawton has much bigger things to worry about. Like being Brian Lawton. On 4/10/2017 at 3:05 PM, Rollins Man said: what the hell is ccslc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KittSmith_95 Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 I said it before: Ho-Sang should be allowed to wear whatever number he feels like. I mean, it's not like he's the only guy to wear 66 since Mario retired. The only other player is T.J. Brodie, and he wore it for his rookie campaign. Yeesh.... 73 (Another unusual number) was only worn by Mike Ryder up until a few years back, not we have a few guys that wear it. Even Brenden Gallagher wore it until Ryder was traded back to the Habs, thus his switch to 11. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEAD! Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 22 hours ago, cmm said: This "controversy" is beyond stupid. I guess Justin Schultz shouldn't wear #4 for the Penguins since that was Bobby Orr's number. It's always awesome to see one of the great names in hockey history ... Gino Odjick. I saw, I came, I left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmm Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 I met Gino Odjick when my high school had a trip to an Isles game! I have his autograph somewhere unless it didn't survive my latest move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
worcat Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 This is a NON-ISSUE. If he had requested to wear #66 for the Penguins and was denied by Mario, then STILL chose to wear #66, then yes, this would be news worthy. However, this is not the case. Move along. Bleeding Blue since 1986 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twi Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 23 hours ago, habsfan1 said: Tonight's game in Vancouver felt like a Habs home game. Is this why Tampa Bay banned Canadiens jerseys from their building? Oof, fact check to aisle 5. Habs apparel was banned from the most premium club seats (not much hockey apparel there at all, but I digress), not from the building. Generally speaking, the ones who come down here rival the degenerates from Philly and Boston. That's why. I can see both sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 Get back out of the league, asswipe ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sodboy13 Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 19 hours ago, The Six said: Is this an actual controversy? Every article I've seen just says "some" are angry, but there's nothing resembling an actual quote from anyone who's against this. Is this fake news? Are we just drumming up outrage over an imaginary group of people's outrage? WHO'S ACTUALLY AGAINST THIS? Pittsburgh sports media has been frothing about it, because it's Lemieux country and Pittsburgh is America's second-dumbest sports media market, behind Boston. On 1/25/2013 at 1:53 PM, 'Atom said: For all the bird de lis haters I think the bird de lis isnt supposed to be a pelican and a fleur de lis I think its just a fleur de lis with a pelicans head. Thats what it looks like to me. Also the flair around the tip of the beak is just flair that fleur de lis have sometimes source I am from NOLA. PotD: 10/19/07, 08/25/08, 07/22/10, 08/13/10, 04/15/11, 05/19/11, 01/02/12, and 01/05/12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.