HABBER-oooooKNOWS Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 The Nucks have named Roberto Captain. I think it's silly, but hey to each his own. Captain Canucklehead Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 It's not like he'll be allowed to wear it on the ice and take forever skating to over to talk to the ref. He's clearly the leader of that team, so it's fitting that he gets that honor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HABBER-oooooKNOWS Posted October 1, 2008 Author Share Posted October 1, 2008 Ya, I get that. Can't he be a silent leader? Lead by example? He can't wear the "C" anyway so who cares. The captain has a job on the ice which he clearly can't do, so some other guy gets to be Co-Captain. I just think it's dumb. It's a nice gesture I suppose, but it's still dumb. Why not make him coach while they're at it. They'll still have an assistant behind the bench running the show, but Luongo is still the coach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForumGhost Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 Why can't goalies wear C's? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenadian Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 From the article; "Only six goaltenders have served as team captains in NHL history. The Montreal Canadiens' Bill Durnan was the last goaltender to serve as captain in the 1947-'48 season. Prior to 1948-'49, the NHL passed a rule prohibiting goalies to act as captain or assistants in what could be called the 'Durnan Rule.' The Canadiens keeper left his crease so much to argue calls that opponents protested saying that Durnan's actions gave the Canadiens unscheduled timeouts during strategic points in games." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ch_nl Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 I never knew Durnan was a Habs! I also tought his name was Durnham! Now I know better. And it made my day. LOL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 this is one time i will agree with Don Cherry having your goalie as captain is stupid. If he is a leader in the room, great, he still would be however you need a guy on the ice who can talk to the refs, and also talk to the guys on the bench, a goalie can't d that. I think that the nucks are just making headlines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Stealth Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 This is just ridiculous.... Luongo is THE leader on the team. The Canucks are announcing that he's their captain and that's it. Ohlund, Mitchell and Kesler will be assistants and handle all the stuff no problem but it's a gesture to him that he's the real leader. It's like Iginla and the Flames, Alfredsson and the Sens and Sakic with the Avs. Luongo is being recognized as the leader of this team and even though he(goalies) can't wear a "C" does not mean he can't be recognized as one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HABBER-oooooKNOWS Posted October 3, 2008 Author Share Posted October 3, 2008 This is just ridiculous.... Luongo is THE leader on the team. The Canucks are announcing that he's their captain and that's it. Ohlund, Mitchell and Kesler will be assistants and handle all the stuff no problem but it's a gesture to him that he's the real leader. It's like Iginla and the Flames, Alfredsson and the Sens and Sakic with the Avs. Luongo is being recognized as the leader of this team and even though he(goalies) can't wear a "C" does not mean he can't be recognized as one. You have listed players and no goalies. Hmmmmmm...... I suppose there is a reason for that. Patrick Roy should have worn a C and how about Martin Brodeur? Even Ed Belfour was quite a vocal leader, he never wore a C. Not very traditional, but hey, the NHL is changing...... yay! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Stealth Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 You have listed players and no goalies. Hmmmmmm...... I suppose there is a reason for that. Patrick Roy should have worn a C and how about Martin Brodeur? Even Ed Belfour was quite a vocal leader, he never wore a C. Not very traditional, but hey, the NHL is changing...... yay! Who gives a shit if they're not goalies? There's the rule that scares teams away from doing such a thing but the Nucks are just having Luongo recognized as the captain. As long as he's not leaving his crease to argue calls, there's nothing wrong with it and there's nothing stupid about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsniper Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 Who gives a shit if they're not goalies? There's the rule that scares teams away from doing such a thing but the Nucks are just having Luongo recognized as the captain. As long as he's not leaving his crease to argue calls, there's nothing wrong with it and there's nothing stupid about it. Yeah there is. It's a "whats the point?" thing. Luongo can still be the teams top leader with the "captain" stamp. He can't wear a C, can't argue with the refs so what exactly is going to change from last year? Roy was one of the Avs top leaders in the glory years and it was never necessary to give him an A he couldn't wear or use. It's a nice gesture for the Canucks to do but it's still stupid. Honestly, it's just them sucking up to their top player so he doesn't bail at the end of his contract when the Canucks still haven't managed to do anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Stealth Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 Yeah there is. It's a "whats the point?" thing. Luongo can still be the teams top leader with the "captain" stamp. He can't wear a C, can't argue with the refs so what exactly is going to change from last year? Roy was one of the Avs top leaders in the glory years and it was never necessary to give him an A he couldn't wear or use. It's a nice gesture for the Canucks to do but it's still stupid. Honestly, it's just them sucking up to their top player so he doesn't bail at the end of his contract when the Canucks still haven't managed to do anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsniper Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 Oh, of course, I'm picking on your poor Canucks. It was a pointless move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Stealth Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 Oh, of course, I'm picking on your poor Canucks. It was a pointless move. Alright we suck, are stupid and have no offense. We are run by monkies that throw their own shit, and a team that can't make an offensive play to save it's life. We will finish very low in the standings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsniper Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 Alright we suck, are stupid and have no offense. We are run by monkies that throw their own shit, and a team that can't make an offensive play to save it's life. We will finish very low in the standings. It's about time you came around. We should bump that Northwest thread for the beginning of the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Stealth Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 It's about time you came around. We should bump that Northwest thread for the beginning of the season. Probably. Good to have hockey back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HABBER-oooooKNOWS Posted October 4, 2008 Author Share Posted October 4, 2008 Alright we suck, are stupid and have no offense. We are run by monkies that throw their own shit, and a team that can't make an offensive play to save it's life. We will finish very low in the standings. Hey, but you are still unbeaten in pre-season. Pretty good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 Oh, of course, I'm picking on your poor Canucks. It was a pointless move. It was pointless but not necessarily stupid. All they're doing is recognizing that Luongo's their team leader, which he is. I suppose they thought it'd be unfair to Luongo to name Ohlund (or anyone else) captain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazy26 Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 You have listed players and no goalies. Hmmmmmm...... I suppose there is a reason for that. Patrick Roy should have worn a C and how about Martin Brodeur? Even Ed Belfour was quite a vocal leader, he never wore a C. Not very traditional, but hey, the NHL is changing...... yay! It's beside the point, but I think Marty was captain for his European team during the lockout year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir_Boagalott Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 Ya, I'm stunned aboot this. A couple of years ago NJ considered naming Broduer their Captain but didnt. Why? Because its useless. A teams Captain has responsibilities and duities on the ice that have absolutely nothing to do with being the teams "leader". By naming a Goalie to be Captain a team has effectively made their team Captainless because Goalies are banned from doing any of the on ice responsibilities of a Captain. The Nucks just hurt their team by choosing a player who cant even do the job. It really makes no sense. Whats next? The Oilers make Joey Moss their Captain because he is such an inspiration to the team? Seriously though, what would be the difference? Neither can physically do the job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Yeah there is. It's a "whats the point?" thing. I cannot, for the life of me, believe I'm going to agree with Minny/Vinny/Whinney. What's the point? Lip service to Luongo. Basically, they're kissing his ass to ensure he stays while the team implodes around him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsniper Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 I cannot, for the life of me, believe I'm going to agree with Minny/Vinny/Whinney. What's the point? Lip service to Luongo. Basically, they're kissing his ass to ensure he stays while the team implodes around him. Hey! Read the end of my post, I said this exact same thing. Dirty copycat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 I really don't see what the big deal is. Is it really that important to have a guy actually wear a "C" on the ice? They'll just have three guys wearing an "A" instead. That's what the Habs did all year when Saku was dealing with his cancer. I certainly don't think the Habs hurt themselves by not having a a guy wear the "C" on the ice. As for other goalie captain candidates, I don't think Roy was ever captain material in Montreal. He was our best player, but he never struck me as a leader, more of a cocky jerk. Then in Colorado he wasn't gonna take the captain title from classy Joe. Brodeur, though, should have been a legitimate possibility for the Devils after Stevens and Niedermeyer left. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 There. See? Koivu isn't really the captain, they're just paying him lip service. Now will all the whiners who feel he's a sucky captain just shut the hell up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsniper Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Then in Colorado he wasn't gonna take the captain title from classy Joe. If Joe hadn't had it for 6 or 7 years already (or whatever it was) he would've. During the flory years, everyone said Roy was the biggest leader on the team in the locker room. Joe is really quiet and never says anything, just leads by example. Roy was the kind of guy who would get pissed off and tell everyone to get their shit together. Game 3 against Jersey was memorable one. Roy apparently did his thing and said "Who's gonna get this next one? (the game was tied) and Bourque said "I got it" and not too far into the 3rd period, Bourque scored on his trademark slapper. Beautiful goal. If they took the C from Sakic and gave it to Roy, I'm not sure many fans would have had a problem with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.