New name for the CCSLC

[Buffalo]

How many hot threads are related to Buffalo these days?

Irregardless, it occurs to me, an ex-Buffalonian in Chicago that WNYers have always had a keen interest in their teams' identity.

I'd bet that the Creamer board, with users from far and wide and all over the world, has a highly disproportionate number of Buffalonians.

Whaddya think?

[ColeJ]

4 very important truths.

1) the music city miracle was perfectly legit play.

2) brett hull's goal was completely legal, and also quite wonderful.

3) irregardless isn't a word.

4) buffalo sucks

please do not delete this post. i mean everything in good fun, as a stars/titans fan... as you can imagine, being a stars/titans fan makes me dislike the city of buffalo quite a bit, since the 2 best moments in the history of my 2 favorite teams are sorta rough spots with that fan particular base

[Cyclopsis Joe]

I thought Buffalo was a part of Canada? So, would things be changing much?

[Phenomenal]

2) brett hull's goal was completely legal, and also quite wonderful.

I'm not a sabres fan, i probably never will be with that ugly logo, but both me and you know, that was NOT legal.

[O.C.D]

Irregardless is absolutely a word. You might wanna Google a word before you say it doesn't exist.

[ebod39]

How many hot threads are related to Buffalo these days?

Irregardless, it occurs to me, an ex-Buffalonian in Chicago that WNYers have always had a keen interest in their teams' identity.

I'd bet that the Creamer board, with users from far and wide and all over the world, has a highly disproportionate number of Buffalonians.

Whaddya think?

I resemble that comment

[pooter]

There is another city also with many, many people on this board. Milwaukee

Evidence is the Brewers throwback Sunday jerseys and ball and glove logo threads numbering in the 5 digit range.

[philly97flyer]

2) brett hull's goal was completely legal, and also quite wonderful.

I'm not a sabres fan, i probably never will be with that ugly logo, but both me and you know, that was NOT legal.

Take a look at the rule book. Was his foot in the crease? Yes. BUT it entered the crease AFTER he had possesion of the puck, which is why the goal was allowed. When Hasek made a save on Hull's inital shot, and Hull got the rebound back, technically, according to the rules, puck possesion never left Hull. This is the same reason why you see guys get an assist when the shooter's initial shot is saved and the rebound is scored by a teammate. A save does not take posession away from the shooter unless the save is controlled by the goaltender. In this case, it was not.

[tp49]

Irregardless is absolutely a word. You might wanna Google a word before you say it doesn't exist.

Just because it is a word does not make using it correct. From Webster's online dictionary.

Main Entry: ir·re·gard·less

Pronunciation: "ir-i-'gärd-l&s

Function: adverb

Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless

nonstandard : REGARDLESS

usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that "there is no such word." There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead.

My favorite Buffalo memory besides the ungodly amount of snow (but not as much as Syracuse) is Norwood's wide right.

[eMKayUSA]

2) brett hull's goal was completely legal, and also quite wonderful.

I'm not a sabres fan, i probably never will be with that ugly logo, but both me and you know, that was NOT legal.

Take a look at the rule book. Was his foot in the crease? Yes. BUT it entered the crease AFTER he had possesion of the puck, which is why the goal was allowed. When Hasek made a save on Hull's inital shot, and Hull got the rebound back, technically, according to the rules, puck possesion never left Hull. This is the same reason why you see guys get an assist when the shooter's initial shot is saved and the rebound is scored by a teammate. A save does not take posession away from the shooter unless the save is controlled by the goaltender. In this case, it was not.

LOL wrong.

[navywhitestripes]

whats the saying ........two things live in texas steers and queers, wheres your horns buddy.

go buffalo javascript:emoticon('(bow)')

[DrBear]

I don't think there are a lot of Milwaukee/Wisconsin people on the board, it's just that:

1. There are a lot of folks here who are wholly irrational on the topic of Brewers throwbacks, both pro and con (and I might be included in that).

2. The Bucks have clearly had a bad look for the last few years, and there has been a lot of comment about that.

3. The Packers have not changed significantly since 1961 and there's always interest in a team that has stuck with a look.

4. Howinhell are you going to get excited about, say, the Colts? They only change their facemasks.

[winters in buffalo]

I'd bet that the Creamer board, with users from far and wide and all over the world, has a highly disproportionate number of Buffalonians.

Whaddya think?

I'm a highly disproportionate ex-Buffalonian!

[IceCap]

2) brett hull's goal was completely legal, and also quite wonderful.

I'm not a sabres fan, i probably never will be with that ugly logo, but both me and you know, that was NOT legal.

Take a look at the rule book. Was his foot in the crease? Yes. BUT it entered the crease AFTER he had possesion of the puck, which is why the goal was allowed. When Hasek made a save on Hull's inital shot, and Hull got the rebound back, technically, according to the rules, puck possesion never left Hull. This is the same reason why you see guys get an assist when the shooter's initial shot is saved and the rebound is scored by a teammate. A save does not take posession away from the shooter unless the save is controlled by the goaltender. In this case, it was not.

LOL wrong.

He's right, actually. Hull's goal was legal.

[Roger Clemente]

2) brett hull's goal was completely legal, and also quite wonderful.

I'm not a sabres fan, i probably never will be with that ugly logo, but both me and you know, that was NOT legal.

Take a look at the rule book. Was his foot in the crease? Yes. BUT it entered the crease AFTER he had possesion of the puck, which is why the goal was allowed. When Hasek made a save on Hull's inital shot, and Hull got the rebound back, technically, according to the rules, puck possesion never left Hull. This is the same reason why you see guys get an assist when the shooter's initial shot is saved and the rebound is scored by a teammate. A save does not take posession away from the shooter unless the save is controlled by the goaltender. In this case, it was not.

LOL wrong.

Actually, this really was made a rule during the 1998-1999 season. Most of the other goals that got waived off that season were because someone who was not the shooter was standing in the crease at the time or because the foot entered the crease before the puck. Brett Hull's goal was fortunate enough to fit both criteria of being LEGAL.

--Roger "Time?" Clemente.

[gbasalmon]

As Buffalo sports fans, I believe it's time we collectively built a bridge and got over ourselves. The more we bitch and complain about stuff that happened a minimum of five years ago, the more we reinforce everybody's conception around the nation of our being nothing more than crybabies.

Suck it up, Buffalo sports fans...

[letterform]

I'm a Canucks fan.

It was a one season rule and a very stupid one. I think the better team won, but perhaps a little too soon.

here's the rule:

"Unless the puck is in the goal crease area, a player of the attacking side may not stand in the goal crease. If a player has entered the crease prior to the puck, and subsequently the puck should enter the net while such conditions prevail, the apparent goal shall not be allowed."

Ask yourself: does it mention ANYTHING about possession?

Uh, NO!!!!!!!!!

Any interpretation of the rule made by an independant body or even the league itself prior to the playoffs would have ruled no goal. The league had blown off similar goals where a player "had possesion" and re-entered the crease all year long. The finals were a different scenario however. The refs blew the call and lost control of the game when the Stars bench emptied onto the ice. They couldn't review the play after that. The league, faced with controversy, and a cup that had allready been awarded, backpeddled and came up with the bit about "having possession" to cover their ass. They immediately dropped the rule for next season because of the controversy.

The puck came out and Hull put his toe in before he brought the puck back in.

No goal!

[Buffalo]

The puck came out and Hull put his toe in before he brought the puck back in.

No goal!

It's good to know that there's some sympathy for the no goal, but can we please go back to the topic?

Buffalonians, ex-Buffalonians, speak up!

[Coast2CoastAM2006]

as we make our way to the free range animals we first come across Buffalonian Hardluckus better known as the Hardluck Buffalo.

The Hardluck Buffalo is a rare breed of Buffalo. Native to upstate New York, the Hardluck Buffalo is just that, Hardluck. No other breed of Buffalo has had as much hard luck as the Hardluck Buffalo. Notable hard lucks include 'No Goal', 'Wide Right', 'Music City Miracle', and '4 consecutive Super Bowl losses'. The Hardluck Buffalo has two specific species: Buffalonian Billus or The Buffalo Bill and Buffalonian Sabrus or the Buffalo Sabre. Both species of the Hardluck Buffalo family are with out championship status in the Jock Kingdom. The Buffalo Bill made four appearances in the Super Bowl but as their name sake states, the Hardluck kicked in and they lost all four games including 'Wide Right'. Its latest hardluck was the 'Music City Miracle. The Buffalo Bill teeters on the endangered species list, as the leaders of the pack continue to let the Buffalo Bill get preyed on instead of preying on other prey.

The Buffalo Sabre has been known to roam the North East Division, however they like to interbreed and it tends to prey on the Toronto Maple Leaf but is known to feast on the Boston Bruin. It too is a member of the Hardluck Buffalo family and is not with out its own hardluck with 'No Goal' highlighting their hard luck. The Classical version of the Buffalo Sabre has been said to have mated with the Demonic Goat and produced the 'Goat Head' variety of the Buffalo Sabre. The Goat Head variety of the Buffalo Sabre has proliferated through the Jock Kingdom. However, recent interbreeding has led to a new species of the Buffalo Sabre, the Buffa-slug. Scientists has concluded that the Goat Head Buffalo Sabre recently bred with the New York Slug. Mass hunting of the Buffa-slug has put this new species on the Endangered Species list.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

I'm not from Buffalo but I am from Rochester. Does that count? Can I start a Western NY alumni club and be in it?

And right, it WAS a forward latteral and it WASN'T a goal. Those are two things I have to believe.