Rite of Spring '14: Can you fall asleep with a panic switch?

[AHcreative]

Jesus Christ Chicago. At least we didn't get :censored:ing bitch slapped across the face.

I thought Toews was the second coming of Jesus? If he is, Hawks better be flying in the third.

1) You didn't? 6-2 on your home ice in Game 7 suggests otherwise.

2) Jonathan Toews is about the last problem Chicago has in this game and in this series right now.

That was one game, at least we took it 7.

And didn't your team get swept in the first round?

Ugh. I didn't know you worked for the franchise.

That bugs you? I always refer to the Rams and Blues (and Cardinals on occasion) as we because I live in the city, support the team, buy the tickets, buy the merchandise, watch the games on TV, etc. I think it's acceptable to refer to your hometown team/team you support as "we."

[CS85]

Jesus Christ Chicago. At least we didn't get :censored:ing bitch slapped across the face.

I thought Toews was the second coming of Jesus? If he is, Hawks better be flying in the third.

1) You didn't? 6-2 on your home ice in Game 7 suggests otherwise.

2) Jonathan Toews is about the last problem Chicago has in this game and in this series right now.

That was one game, at least we took it 7.

And didn't your team get swept in the first round?

Ugh. I didn't know you worked for the franchise.

Don't act like you've never referred to the Bears, Cubs, and/or Blackhawks as "we" or "us".

I have not, actually. I make a point not to.

edit: Dammit people we discussed this on, like, episode 6 of Basically a Sports Show.

[LMU]

The only time it's acceptable to use "we" is if you received a paycheck from a team. In the case of college sports, if you were enrolled in that school.

[IceCap]

Yeah, that's generally my take on it too. The only teams I refer to as "we" are the University of Western Ontario Mustangs.

[Kramerica Industries]

Jesus Christ Chicago. At least we didn't get :censored:ing bitch slapped across the face.

I thought Toews was the second coming of Jesus? If he is, Hawks better be flying in the third.

1) You didn't? 6-2 on your home ice in Game 7 suggests otherwise.

2) Jonathan Toews is about the last problem Chicago has in this game and in this series right now.

That was one game, at least we took it 7. And didn't your team get swept in the first round?

I never said Toews was the problem, I'm just saying that if he truly is the second coming, he should be able to will the Hawks to victory in the third.

You were inherently referring to how the Ducks did vs. LA to how the 'Hawks are doing vs. LA. How the Lightning did against the Habs with their backup goalie really couldn't matter less.

[LMU]

Yeah, that's generally my take on it too. The only teams I refer to as "we" are the University of Western Ontario Mustangs.

Bingo. Other than my Loyola Marymount University Lions, it's always they or them.

BBTV at least can use we for the Eagles.

[AHcreative]

I really beg to differ. By purchasing the paraphernalia of the team, going to games, etc. You're keeping that team around so you are very much so apart of it. I almost literally have grown up in the Edward Jones Dome, being blessed with season tickets since I was a kid, so it's like a second home to me.

EDIT: Back on topic: tie game.

[CS85]

The only time it's acceptable to use "we" is if you received a paycheck from a team. In the case of college sports, if you were enrolled in that school.

Yeah, that's generally my take on it too. The only teams I refer to as "we" are the University of Western Ontario Mustangs.

[TalktoChuck]

I really beg to differ. By purchasing the paraphernalia of the team, going to games, etc. You're keeping that team around so you are very much so apart of it. I almost literally have grown up in the Edward Jones Dome, being blessed with season tickets since I was a kid, so it's like a second home to me.

EDIT: Back on topic: tie game.

You might as well use "we" when referring to Coke, Pepsi, or any other business you purchase goods/services from then too.

[Funky Bunky]

Jesus Christ Chicago. At least we didn't get :censored:ing bitch slapped across the face.

I thought Toews was the second coming of Jesus? If he is, Hawks better be flying in the third.

1) You didn't? 6-2 on your home ice in Game 7 suggests otherwise.

2) Jonathan Toews is about the last problem Chicago has in this game and in this series right now.

That was one game, at least we took it 7. And didn't your team get swept in the first round?

I never said Toews was the problem, I'm just saying that if he truly is the second coming, he should be able to will the Hawks to victory in the third.

You were inherently referring to how the Ducks did vs. LA to how the 'Hawks are doing vs. LA. How the Lightning did against the Habs with their backup goalie really couldn't matter less.

Yeah, and I was talking about the series at whole, not just one game. Nor am I talking about just one game here.

And FWIW, the Ducks (see I didn't use "we") weren't using their starter (at the time Freddie Andersen) either when they were eliminated.

[CS85]

This chinese food I ordered is really good, I'm so glad we made it for me.

[AHcreative]

I really beg to differ. By purchasing the paraphernalia of the team, going to games, etc. You're keeping that team around so you are very much so apart of it. I almost literally have grown up in the Edward Jones Dome, being blessed with season tickets since I was a kid, so it's like a second home to me.

EDIT: Back on topic: tie game.

You might as well use "we" when referring to Coke, Pepsi, or any other business you purchase goods/services from then too.

That's a little different. I mean, we cheer for our teams' respective successes. Do you really cheer for Coke to beat Pepsi in annual sales or vice versa?

[Funky Bunky]

And regarding the "we", "us", etc. crap, if you really want to get technical, you probably shouldn't say "we" unless you were actually a part of the team. Even if you went to that school or work for that franchise, it wasn't like you were on the field/ice/whatever.

[TorinK92]

Damn, the Hawks have really come to life again here.

[AHcreative]

FWIW, I don't really care, I'm just stating my case. I refer to the teams I support as "we" or "us," if you choose to refer to them as "them," that's your prerogative.

[CS85]

FWIW, I don't really care, I'm just stating my case. I refer to the teams I support as "we" or "us," if you choose to refer to them as "them," that's your prerogative.

Sure, it irks me because 1) I get worked up over pretty much everything, 2) it smacks false to me, since you had nothing to do with that team's success. You can argue, "well I bought the stuff that gave them money for their players," etc. when really that money would've been there anyway thanks to, in the NHL's case, revenue sharing. Plus your measly merchandise expenditure per year amounts to 1% of the pay of a healthy scratch on an AHL team. For one period of one game.

[AHcreative]

FWIW, I don't really care, I'm just stating my case. I refer to the teams I support as "we" or "us," if you choose to refer to them as "them," that's your prerogative.

Sure, it irks me because 1) I get worked up over pretty much everything, 2) it smacks false to me, since you had nothing to do with that team's success. You can argue, "well I bought the stuff that gave them money for their players," etc. when really that money would've been there anyway thanks to, in the NHL's case, revenue sharing. Plus your measly merchandise expenditure per year amounts to 1% of the pay of a healthy scratch on an AHL team. For one period of one game.

I don't vote because politics is something I don't have a strong grasp of, but just to play devil's advocate: that's like saying voting doesn't matter. Every little bit counts.

[Kramerica Industries]

And FWIW, the Ducks (see I didn't use "we") weren't using their starter (at the time Freddie Andersen) either when they were eliminated.

This is true but, lets not kid ourselves, we both know that Fredrick Andersen, John Gibson, or Jonas Hiller; take your pick of any of those three because it doesn't matter at all, are all much better goaltenders than Anders Lindback. Part of that is Tampa Bay's problem, of course, for not having a quality backup, but this particular sub-topic is completely irrelevant to the original point here.

[CS85]

FWIW, I don't really care, I'm just stating my case. I refer to the teams I support as "we" or "us," if you choose to refer to them as "them," that's your prerogative.

Sure, it irks me because 1) I get worked up over pretty much everything, 2) it smacks false to me, since you had nothing to do with that team's success. You can argue, "well I bought the stuff that gave them money for their players," etc. when really that money would've been there anyway thanks to, in the NHL's case, revenue sharing. Plus your measly merchandise expenditure per year amounts to 1% of the pay of a healthy scratch on an AHL team. For one period of one game.

I don't vote because politics is something I don't have a strong grasp of, but just to play devil's advocate: that's like saying voting doesn't matter. Every little bit counts.

When NJTank reads that post:

[Funky Bunky]

FWIW, I don't really care, I'm just stating my case. I refer to the teams I support as "we" or "us," if you choose to refer to them as "them," that's your prerogative.

Sure, it irks me because 1) I get worked up over pretty much everything, 2) it smacks false to me, since you had nothing to do with that team's success. You can argue, "well I bought the stuff that gave them money for their players," etc. when really that money would've been there anyway thanks to, in the NHL's case, revenue sharing. Plus your measly merchandise expenditure per year amounts to 1% of the pay of a healthy scratch on an AHL team. For one period of one game.

The average AHL salary is around $60,000. Divide that by 228 (76 games X 3 periods), and you get 263.16. Multiply that by 0.01 and you get $2.63. So unless I :censored:ed up the math, you are incorrect.