soohockey15

I appreciate the joy and fun of college basketball tournament time, but from a basketball-watching standpoint its pretty brutal. I'll watch the tourney once it starts but the conference tourneys just don't do much for me. Give me NBA every day.

....pm sent

Cooke's long-running history of cheap-shots helped him earn this suspension. If someone like David Backes did the same thing, it wouldn't have been the same suspension (and rightly so). This point isn't debatable. I think everyone knows Matt Cooke plays hard. Some guys play hard and clean. Others play hard and dirty. Not difficult to figure out which category Cooke falls in. You don't have to remind us... Wrong again. So wait, his elbow 'accidentally' went away from the natural path of his body into McDonagh's head? The hit was 100% intentional. Cooke saying that he 'needs to change the way he plays' is all the evidence we need that the hit was intentional. He's 32 years old. By the time he changes something about his game, he will already be irrelevant. Might be the most rational thing you've ever said.

What's Faison's other option? Testify for the bill in defiance of the SBoHE and UND?

Here's the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lmn2B0TuF8&feature=player_embedded Cheap shot champion.

Happened early in the 2nd half. Chicago State plays incredibly terrible defense. They looked like a city league team.

There were multiple examples of Cooke going out of his way in an attempt to injure after the player had played the puck. The Savard hit is sickening, as are his repeated attempts to take out players' knees. I guess trying to injure a player (and justifying it by saying he's making a play on the puck) who isn't looking is just fine, but a line somewhere is crossed when two consenting players drop the gloves. The amount of hypocrisy in your argument is incredible.

So here's what DaveK constitutes as good, clean play: Running around the ice headhunting and taking guys' knees out; intentional attempts to injure the other guy. "Rough" stuff that has no place in the NHL: Two guys, both of whom are agreeing to go at it, going at it. Perfectly within the rules. It makes my brain hurt wondering how you're fine with the way Cooke plays while also being so vehemently against fighting.

If you don't like fighting in the NHL, you are free to watch women's hockey.

Here's Matt Cooke doing a bunch of Matt Cooke things: My link

You had it up until that last part. The downtown restaurants are very popular, but Whitey's hasn't kept up with the curve.

Try not to be so butthurt.

Ha, so a team with a bad defense and an awful running game would only lose 2 more games if they didn't have one of the best QBs in the league? Is that what you're saying? That team is awful without Manning. Replacing him with a random QB would make them much worse. Replacing Favre with a random QB would make the Vikings better. A team with a top-10 defense and running game should not be 6-10, plain and simple.

I disagree. Manning had the lowest yards/attempt since his rookie year and was sacked more than he had been since 2007. He isn't very mobile, but he has a quick release and does a good job avoiding pressure. Just watching the games you'd be able to see how little time he had to throw. The Colts without Manning are 3-13 at best. The Vikings without Favre might have a better record.