TurdBurglar

I don't think MB was a bad GM. When he came in, he did a lot of good things. At some point every GM faces the fact they need to do something to take the next step. Sometimes it pays off (Subban for Weber, Galchenyuk for Domi), sometimes it doesn't (Sergachev for Drouin). When things go castrophically bad (Sergachev for Drouin) it's hard to dig yourself out of that hole, which causes desperation and more high risk moves (Signing Alzner) that either make you look great or stupid. It's the natural progression of most GMs.

Heatley did the same thing to a degree, he managed to likely stay out of jail by taking a plea deal. The NHL has a long history of turning a blind eye, so it's not that surprising.

The entire idea came from you dude. You blamed me for saying it then accused me of saying you said it. This entire situation is you making shit up and now you're tossing out insults. Seriously, read the comments, it came from you and you're the one making shit up assigning blame. Now you're just flat out lying. You can't even be accountable for your own actions.

Very good. It was in response to you blaming me for shit you made up. You could try not doing that maybe?

Then stop bringing it up. Don't keep dredging shit up, making more shit up and telling me to let it go.

I didn't say you said that. This whole idea of Babcock sabotaging Vincent came from you, not that you said that's what happened, but it came from you then you implied that's what I was saying. You literally made the situation up and first tried to imply I was saying it, now saying that I'm accusing you of saying it. Nobody claimed Vincent was sabotaged, you brought up the idea that he was by CBJ. You're the one who planted the idea of a coach being affected a previous coach leaving abruptly. In the same comment none-the-less. The conversation was done, over. I responded to fanpuck and then you implied I was saying Babcock sabotaged him. I corrected it, you denied doing it. Now you're switching your stance to I said you claimed Babcock sabotaged him. Stop putting words in my mouth that's 100% coming from you. This is the second time you've done it. You've said before you don't want someone to do it to you, so stop being a hypocrite by doing it to others. That's is the real difference, you're the one who made up this sabotage narrative and keep blaming me for it. Go back through every one of my comments, I never once blamed Babcock directly for any of it. That all came from you. Stop making shit up and blaming me.

Commandant made the sabotage comment, which is what you were replying to my comment about. I understand you may not of been talking about it later, but that's the comment chain I was replying to.

The good news of that contract is if it doesn't work out, it can be buried with no cap hit.

This is where the idea came from and what we were discussing. My original post was the Babcock situation was too short lived to poison the well, then someone else started with the sabotage stuff, which is where this all got derailed.

That may of been most of your point, but you started by shoehorning in the implication. Just because you want to deflect away from it, doesn't mean you didn't do it. You were corrected, then got an attitude about it. Just be clear on what happened, regardless of what you want claim happened.

The only person that brought up Babcock sabotaging Vincent was you.

You implied I was blaming Babcock for sabotaging Vincent, which is the opposite of what I've been saying all along. For someone who doesn't like words put in their mouth, you're more than willing to do it to others. I did read what you wrote, so cut the attitude.

I didn’t say Babcock sabotaged him. I said Babcocks’s non-existent tenure didn’t sabotage him.

Roy instilled a culture in the team in the 3 years he was there. To be a fair comparison you'd have to believe Babcock instilled the same level of culture to be equally disrupted by the change. I agree Larsen would be a better comparison, but the discussion was about Babcock's nearly non-existant tenure somehow sabotaging Vincent.

Soccer also has an aggregate system too, where they play 2 games in an elimination series and total the scores of both games. Highest total score wins, first tie breaker of that being most road goals scored win. I believe if road goals are equal as that point, it goes to penalty kicks. The championship itself is a single game elimination with penalty kicks after regulation. This is for league play and I don't believe it applies to international play in most cases.