Fanpuck33

I just noticed something - when NBC and USA are both airing the same love track events, they have separate commentary. So they can pay two groups of people to cover the same event, but can't stream their own commentators? Good grief.

It's definitely an improvement on previous years where some events had no commentary and others had what sounded like student interns. But NBC has lots of announcers and commentators that I actually like, so it drives me crazy that they don't just use their own feed. I mean, they're already paying them to call the action, so why not use it? You'd think by now that contracts for on-air talent would include streaming. They do the same kind of thing on Peacock for snow sports. I tried it out since they really cut back on biathlon and cross-country skiing this year, so I gave Peacock a try. Video with no commentary. Unwatchable. Even alpine skiing witch they aired on TV with their regular commentary only had video online. US took down Canada for the bronze in track cycling women's pursuit. But WOW at the Germans winning gold. They practically caught the Brits!

And they've got the rights through 2032. Ugh. It seems like they are actually showing less this year than in precious years. They relegated tennis and wrestling to The Olympic Channel, which they've never used for live coverage of events before since it doesn't have the carriage of their other networks. They're also not using MSNBC at all, which is unusual. They don't even follow the schedule they have online, so I have to record every hour of coverage and check to see what it is before I watch/delete it. And while I am not big on gymnastics in general, one event I do like is the rings. They didn't show one competitor on that apparatus in either their team coverage or all around coverage. Their online coverage is annoying, too. They do at least have some commentary on the events, but it isn't NBC people. And they stick in ads everywhere on the streaming. They ignored much of the late rounds of archery one day and they put in a 30 second ad between every single set. And they did it by cutting off the commentator in the middle of a sentence. I remember having complaints, but I don't remember it being this bad. I don't know if it really is worse than usual of my excitement about the Olympics just clouds my memory. Or maybe it is just that I love the winter Olympics and their coverage of that tends to me better since it isn't as popular here. I feel like I remember not evening watching any of the prime time coverage because everything had already aired live. Of course, that is what they want to avoid in the summer.

Shocked we were already ignoring the Olympics in the Lounge way back in 2012! Highlight of week 1 was Lydia Jacoby winning the 100m breast stroke. The celebration at the watch party in her home town was awesome. Bobby Fink's final 50 Ithe 800m and 1500m were pretty awesome, too. Lee Kiefer winning our first gold in Foil was cool, though I find foil to be the most difficult form of fencing to watch. Low points so far would be volleyball. Men's indoor team fell apart from the service line and failed to advance out of the group, while 3 of 4 beach teams went out in the round of 16. The women's indoor team is still going, but have two starters out with ankle injuries. Oh, and Archery was highly disappointing as well with no medals. Lowest point is NBC's coverage. So many replays of events they've already shown being televised instead of full events from other sports. Not a single US judoka was shown, and most medal matches they showed were joined in progress near the end. Lots of archery and shooting events were shown in abbreviated form. I thought they had gotten over their habit of not showing events live that they plan on showing in primetime, but they've done it again with athletics and gymnastics. And tonight they've been showing the same thing live on two channels. Ugh. Edit: And immediately after posting this, they cut to commercial right in the middle of a long jumper running up to the line. Not the first instance of such crap.) And the whole reason I looked up the 2012 thread... Y'all finally got your revenge in women's soccer. We were aided in 2012 by the weirdest call I've ever seen and today the game was decided by a brutal penalty call. I have no idea how they overturn the no-call on the field. I guess all you have to do to draw a penalty is stick your leg in front of someone trying to play the ball. Not that the US was ever going to win. They did almost nothing with all their possession and looked no better than the Australia game.

If the Sabres are forced to give in in the surgery because nobody wants to take the risk on trading for him before it, then Eichel would be a fool to to give 100% when he comes back. It's his only way out of Buffalo, because nobody is taking on that contract if he doesn't come back looking like a star player.

If I were a GM, I would not even think about Eichel unless the Sabres allow him to have the surgery and you can see what he is like once he comes back from it. You risk the price going up with the issue cleared up, but you force Buffalo to take the risk of the surgery.

I figured there had to be some rule about that, but had only heard about not being able to activate unless compliant.

Well, if Byron is on board to sit out the season, I believe they could LTIR him along with Weber and get full advantage of both contracts if they spend to the cap prior to it. As I understand it, a player can only be activated from LTIR if the team is cap compliant, even if healthy. It was suggested that this was why Kucherov looked like he was at 100% right from the start of the playoffs - because he could have been playing and simply could not be activated.

I would have liked to have added a puck moving defenseman, but to me the state of the D depends largely on Romanov's development. If he comes to camp motivated by the playoff benching, it is entirely possible that he becomes the top 4 D we need and Chiarot or Edmunson is pushed down to being a great 3rd pairing guy instead of Savard. As long as one of Chiarot, Edmunson, or Savard is on the 3rd pairing we should be in good shape.

Huh, that is how that word can be used. I guess at some point my brain kind of combined the two meanings of the word. (i.e. I expect you are right vs. I expect my guests to arrive soon.) I started applying the anticipatory nature of the second use to the first use. So rather than using it to mean that I think something is true, I use it to mean that I anticipate something to be true in the future. So I was having trouble figuring out how the word was being applied to something that already happened, haha. Ok, my grammar tangent is finished.

I'm a guy who loves Anderson and thinks he can be a 30 goal guy on the right line, but there is no player on the team who is a better option than Caufield to play wing the #1 scoring line. If last season was more than just a career year for Toffoli, then he's in the conversation.

I'm with you. I have the blinds shut almost all summer trying to help out the AC not have to work as hard and missing seeing out the windows while the sun is out. And as I always say, you can always put more clothes on, but you can only take so much off. Hence why I keep the thermostat at 62°F all winter, but can't take 78°F in the summer as I get older. And as a pasty white guy, I appreciate glum weather, as it means I won't burn in 10 minutes.

Both of those are your ideas, so I'm not sure what opinion of mine you were "expecting" (still not sure what that means in the context). I just brought up the idea that Anderson is in the mix for a letter next season. Anyone who wore one last season is obviously at least in the discussion.

Disagree 1000%.

I imagine he sees more of an opportunity to get in the lineup in Tampa. In Montreal he was behind Lehkonen and Armia on the 4th line, and would split any time he would get with Byron. (As things currently stand, at least.) Tampa just lost their entire 3rd line, so there are openings on their depth lines. There's also the fact of how good Tampa is.