Sean McCormick
Sean McCormick
Calling out Kiprusoff: If the Flames want to be considered serious contenders, they need Miikka Kiprusoff of old.

Photo Gallery

Oct. 13:
You will be bloody-well disappointed if you don't have a look at our gallery.
Fantasy and games
Fantasy Hockey Pick'Em Pool
Boston Pizza Weekend Winners
Fantasy Hockey Pool
Saturday Hockey Survivor
Setanta Sports Premiership Predictor
KFC Canadian Football Survivor
Incredible Hulk DVD Contest
Proline Instant Replay Contest
Sean McCormick
Calling out Kiprusoff
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Mike Keenan made a bold statement this week when he challenged his Calgary Flames to shave half-a-goal against from last season's average of 2.73 -- one that ranked the Flames 15th in the NHL.

Reducing that number by half-a-goal would represent a 20 per cent drop; 16 games worth of goals. That's a lot.

One glance at Miikka Kiprusoff's numbers since he burst onto the scene in Calgary for the run to the Cup final in 2004, and it's clear that Iron Mike was staring right through to the back of Miikka's skull when he issued the challenge.

Shaving half-a-goal a game from Calgary's goals against average last season would drop the number to 2.20- - right into the range of Kiprusoff's numbers from three years ago when he was fresh off his run to the Cup final -- the stingiest and most dominant point of his career.

Since the 2005-06 season, Kiprusoff's numbers have steadily declined in every major goaltending category for three consecutive seasons. And the numbers have declined steadily and consistently on a team that has been consistenly deemed a contender to win the Stanley Cup.
Season W L GAA SV% SO
2005-06 42 20 2.07 .923 10
2006-07 40 24 2.46 .917 7
2007-08 39 26 2.69 9.06 2

His save percentage has dropped in three straight seasons, and so have his victories and shutouts (dramatically). At the same time, his goals against average and losses have slowley inched the other way, to the highest points of his Calgary Flame career.

Darryl Sutter has repeatedly defended the goaltender that he will pay $8.5 million this year, pointing to his win totals that are, although declining, consistently in the 40-win range. Let the record show that Andrew Raycroft established a new Maple Leafs record for victories in a season two years ago when he won 37 games in Toronto and he was nowhere CLOSE to being one of the top goalies in team history. In fact, there are those who will remember Raycroft as one of the worst.

Another common defence of Kiprusoff is that he is a perenially slow starter, who plays his best hockey at the end of the season when it matters most. But wins are worth the same -- two points -- in October that they are in April. Nevermind the fact that $8.5-million goaltenders aren't paid to have their performance ebb and flow with the rest of the goaltending fraternity. At the end of the day, Kiprusoff's late-season play has not led the Flames past the first round of the playoffs in five years.

After all, $8.5-million goaltenders are paid to dominate each and every game they play, and Kiprusoff needs to pull up his striped socks and dominate like the money goaltender he is supposed to be. If he does that, the half-a-goal against will take care of itself.

Printer friendly
I wonder how long it's gonna take for Aluminum Mike to lose patience with the Kipper?

It would be one thing if Miikka (what's with the silent i's and k's?) was taking the team into the 3rd round every year, but with a slow start and then a 1st round s'long, it's getting harder and harder to justify 8.5 per.

If I was a Flames fan, I'd be starting to think about all the other things that kind of dough could bring to the team.

Kipper was a steal when the Flames first picked him up, but it's starting to look like Calgary is now the one getting robbed, instead of the opposition. This season could be his last as a

Posted by: FrozenFinger | Friday October 10, 2008, 12:50 am ET
6-0. Ouch!
Posted by: TripleBlue | Friday October 10, 2008, 1:21 am ET
weird when Iron mike was hired it was said how long till he kicks kipper out of town... I for one think kipper is OK, the team around is has gotten much worse.

Really though, is there a better available goalie???

And from what I can find on the net kipper is only making 5.8 not 8.5 a year.
Posted by: bandwagon | Friday October 10, 2008, 1:28 am ET
Wow when you really look at his numbers they really are going the wrong way. and after tonight. I think there might be some fireworks in Calgary early this year!

Good Blog Dude I think the main reason for it is, he was such a mystery to solve in the playoff run, and in the year after. but now that teams seem to have the calgary system down, they know how to play against it better.
Posted by: RaySUCKS | Friday October 10, 2008, 1:40 am ET
I think kipper exemplifies what it means to be a flame ,look at their season opener against the... sorry,didn't S-net say, last in division Canucks? what's kip's GA average? How much are the flames paying him? why is he so highly touted in Calgary? why the heck is Keenan still coaching? pick up Big Bert ,that'll help! the flames are crashing and burning already and nobody in Calgary notices yet.
Posted by: dleihstaem | Friday October 10, 2008, 1:51 am ET
Nice big Dude you even have the stats posted for those slow flamer fans out there...he was never more than a backup goalie when he left sanjose...he has terrible rebound control, has no emotion,and benefitted from a clutch and grab style the flamers perfected...problem is the new NHL doesnt allow that anymore...and the ever slow defence of the flamers is also not helping his cause...a goalie is only as good as his team but the fundamentals need to be there to even have a chance...
Posted by: stallion | Friday October 10, 2008, 1:58 am ET
Hey Stallion,

If Kipper was only good because of the clutch and grab style of the old NHL, how did he win the Vezina in the 2005-2006 season? That was the first "new NHL" season. Did every other goalie in the league have a terrible year? It's funny to see somebody insult a fan base and then clearly display that he does not know what he's talking about.


You're projecting stats for the season based on one game? Are you seriously asking about Kipper's GA this season? I guess Gretzky's goal scoring record will fall to the mighty Alex Burrows, the Leafs will go undefeated and the Wings will not win a game. Somebody who pays attention to hockey could make a very good post about Kipper's deteriorating play, but you sure haven't.

Anyway, nice blog. This has been a concern for many of us Flames fans for some time now. His problem last year was letting in weak goals; he still makes incredible saves, but he lets in garbage goals that really bring the rest of the team down. He needs to improve.

Either way the Flames have him long term. If he can recapture his old form he'll be worth the money he makes...if not, Sutter won't be able to unload him to save his life. I'm nervous about it.
Posted by: 89in2004 | Friday October 10, 2008, 8:54 am ET
A well written blog for once. The only way Kipper will regain his form is when 'Iron' Mike is shown the door. He has done nothing in his career but ruin/trade solid goalies with his constant impatience,criticism and scrutiny.
Posted by: Lever23 | Friday October 10, 2008, 9:42 am ET
This is the problem with the NHL salary structure. Too much emphasis is placed on previous and/or past performances. Kipper was good. Kipper has not been good for about two seasons. he hasnt stunk either, but this is a team that foolishly paid a career backup upper ech wages in an attempt to reclaim past glories. Mike "goalie killer" Keenan is up to his old tricks again with the head games and what not. Remeber, this guy couldnt utilize Hasek, Joseph, Belfour, and luongo to get his teams over in the past. the flames players look like hockey is a job for them. They do not look like a team that is enjoying themselves at all out there, and as such, they get crushed in games by teams like the "nucks" who have never won any cups, and with any luck, never will.
Posted by: lil_mont | Friday October 10, 2008, 9:54 am ET
Why isn't the media getting on Kipprusoff's case more? This guy was an elite goalie for a year and a half. The last couple of years though, he's looked like a shadow of his former self. Last year he was the 30th ranked goalie! His numbers were TERRIBLE with a good defense infront of him. Yet everyone claims he's a top 5 goalie. Look at his numbers, they're getting worse year after year. Only late in the year last year did he get his save % above .900. I'd be very concerned if I was a Flames fan with the way he's been playing. He's in the first year of a new, huge 5 year deal.
Posted by: RogerRoeper | Friday October 10, 2008, 10:32 am ET
Good post by 89in2004. Kipper's play is key because any team that wants to be considered a contender needs first-rate goaltending. 89in2004 is absolutely right about the issue of garbage goals being the problem, not his general play. Too many games were dropped last year (including a playoff game) due in large part to a demoralizing or untimely garbage goal.

As far as this season, it's too early to tell. I have faith that the talent is there and he will find his focus. He got lit up 6 times against Vancouver, but to be honest he didn't have much chance on any of those. He let out a bad rebound on Burrows' second goal, but there were 3 Flames standing around not picking up Burrows who should have been clearing it away. The team needs to be stronger mentally - they seemed flustered after the first period after coming out down a goal despite dominating.
Posted by: diobrain | Friday October 10, 2008, 10:50 am ET
The Flames are falling apart.
Posted by: EdmontonJay | Friday October 10, 2008, 10:53 am ET
I'm certainly not a Nuck fan but I do love it when somebody lays a licking on the flameouts! I will say this as well, I've been surprised & impressed with the Canucks. They are a fast, hard working club & if they stay away from injuries they're gonna make some noise. We are early yet though but I'm still impressed with them.
Posted by: hiccupman | Friday October 10, 2008, 11:00 am ET
6-0 hahaha suckers!! go canucks go
Posted by: Matteus884 | Friday October 10, 2008, 11:20 am ET
Oddly enough, Kipper's numbers, despite playing on a better defensive team in a lower scoring conference were 99% the same as Martin Gerber's last year...Ouch.
Posted by: Kenothicles | Friday October 10, 2008, 11:53 am ET
Last nights game reminded me of the Patrick Roy scenario - unless Kipper wanted to stay in - I thought Iron Mike was making a mistake with the status quo - it is Mike's Team - so in the end it

was his decision not Kippers. Is Kipper related to Nikolai ?

Posted by: skyhigh | Friday October 10, 2008, 12:40 pm ET
hmmm.... Kippersoft... 8.5mil???? He kinda stinks these days.

Ironing Mike Keenan, should stick to putting creases in pants, he stinks too.

One of the worst memories of being a canuck fan was his tenure in vancity... oh poor, poor flamers. However one of the best memories was the trade the idiot made. Bertuzzi for Luongo. What a ninkumpoop.

Hopefully sutter will do the right thing and fire his a$$.

Posted by: Royyan | Friday October 10, 2008, 1:34 pm ET
i'm not a flame supporter at all, but it seems to me, if they limited their odd man rushes against to only one or 2 a period their goalie would look a hell of a lot better. last night..6-0 for vancouver, every goal the result of an odd man situation. Anyone who knows anything at all about hockey knows that a poorly defended odd man rush will expose any goalie, so a good chunk of the blame for kippers declining #'s should be apportioned to whoever is supposed to be running the defense on that team, and the defenders who either aren't executing good coaching, or who are executing a flawed plan, as the case may be. In fairness to kiprusoff, he stopped everything he should be expected to stop.
Posted by: Towersofdub | Friday October 10, 2008, 1:50 pm ET
Good blog dude.

Keep telling it as you see it. A lot of people can't seem to handle your opinion, even though it makes sense when you put it out there. All the whining that ensues is entertaining. (i.e. your "stroking Roberto's ego" blog).

The face of the Flames has changed the past couple years from the crease out. In 2004 you could visibly see the hunger they had and they limited the chances opponents got to mostly lower percentage chances.

Since then it's been a really slow dive. They've picked up some players with more talent but I find their character players are really lacking and having a harder time keeping up and/or making good decisions.

This is exposing Kipprusoff more and more and likely wearing away at his confidence. There are only a few goalies at any point in time that are able to bounce back year after year regardless of what happened last game or last season.
Posted by: hankthetank | Friday October 10, 2008, 2:34 pm ET
Talk about spinning stats to suit your argument.

Kiprusoff's cap hit is $5.8 million, not 8.5 Cap hit is all that matters in a capped world based on it, right? Otherwise let's talk about how Shawn Horcoff is a $7 million player this year.

Kipper's play dropped off badly last season. But the two years before that, those declines are jaded - scoring went up around the league after the lockout, and the Flames' team philosphy turned into run-and-gun. In 05-06 you could say his stats declined from the year before. But actually he was a better goalie and won the Vezina. In 06-07 he singlehandedly won the Flames two games in their series with Detroit. he was amazing.

In 2003-04 the team allowed 22 shots a game. Last year they allowed over 30. 8 extra shots - almost amounts to an extra goal allowed per game - oh wait 1.69 GAA in 2004 compared to 2.69 last year...maybe there is something to that, no?

last year sucked. But those who will point to last nights game obviously didn't watch it. The only goal not scored into a wide-open net on a rebound or cross-crease pass, was on a breakaway. I felt so bad for the guy, knowing so many would pile on him for something he couldn't control.

I've been one of the biggest Kipper bashers last year but please, the timing of this blog, after a 6-0 in game 1/82, is pathetic.

Long live king Kipper!!!!
Posted by: arloiginla | Friday October 10, 2008, 4:01 pm ET
Come on people... it's only one game... Roy, Brodeur and every other goalie had a bad game here and there. A drop off in stats? Well that's quite simply because the team they have now is not as good year by year due constant change of personnel.

And i know you are going to point to shutouts and GAA as the example of how his quality has gone down. But let's face it, we're into the 4th year of non clutch and grab league, speed league. And there's a whole lot less grabbing and fouling going on in comparison to the 1st year. That's one of the biggest reasons why a goalie like Kiprusoff suffers statistically.

Kiprusoff didn't have a full season in the NHL until breaking out the year when they went to the Finals (good thing they didn't win). Then he had one stellar season. And then he was good but not great for 2 years. We're talking 4 years worth of hockey here. It's not like Brodeur having 2 horrible seasons after having 15 good ones. Kiprusoff had 1 and a half great seasons and 2 that weren't as great. Going by this history it's clear that most of his career he wasn't great. So, what do u expect from him? I think this shows that overall he hasn't been one of the top goalies for any significant period of time.

I think if Brodeur, Nabokov, Giguere have a bad season then we could wonder what's wrong, but in the case of Kiprusoff he simply hasn't played enough hockey yet.

And if anyone saw the game last night they would realize that the problem wasn't the goaltending but the defending. How many times did the Canucks have the odd man rushes? How good was the defending on the first Sedin goal? or on the Bernier goal? Or why was Burrows open for the rebound for the 3rd goal? after that the game was over.

Posted by: bummer | Friday October 10, 2008, 6:13 pm ET
The Flames have a run n' gun play philosophy? Please. You haven't had the offensive players to back up that so-called philosophy for years. Maybe Iginla plays that style, but the rest certainly don't. Next a Canucks fan will try to convince us that they play a run n' gun style too.
Posted by: Goilers | Friday October 10, 2008, 7:31 pm ET
Kipper's stats go as the team's go. Last year was his only bad season. In 2006/07, he was nominated FOR THE VEZINA, despite a drop in numbers from the season before (where he won it). He also, as arlo mentioned, singlehandedly pushed Detroit to 6 games in one of the most impressive goaltending performances I've ever seen.

So, this "statistical" trend contains several anomalies: to begin with, the first season he played was pre-lockout. The second season he played on the stingiest defensive team in the league, and had a season the likes of which the great majority of netminders will never see. The third season he played, he was nominated for the Vezina on a team that went from 28th in GF to 5th. Think there was a change in team philosophy?

Which leads us to last season, which was not acceptable. But WE'RE still only looking at three seasons. This "trend" is pretty weak, and looks pretty silly when you consider the timing - after a 6-0 shellacking that was the fault of the entire team.
Posted by: AltaGuy | Friday October 10, 2008, 9:39 pm ET
Well, the Flames have lost the season openers for the last 7 years so no big news.
Posted by: inmyopinion | Friday October 10, 2008, 11:39 pm ET
Calling out Kiprusoff? But Dude "YOU'LL TAKE ROLIE".....That was a real classic.
Posted by: swash | Saturday October 11, 2008, 4:22 am ET
swash...and Kipper's won the Flames exactly how many more playoff rounds than Roli for the Oil?
Posted by: JephC | Saturday October 11, 2008, 1:14 pm ET
Kipper over Roli??!! Let's wait and see.........a lot of you flames fan are gong to be very dissappointed in kipper this year. Not saying Roli is going to tear it up but......
Posted by: spikejones | Saturday October 11, 2008, 1:19 pm ET
JephC....So is Roli your pick to be the horse the Oilers ride when they eventually drop down to 2 goalies?
Posted by: swash | Saturday October 11, 2008, 3:40 pm ET
When your number one, vezina winning, star-acclaimed goaltender has won the same amount of playoff rounds as our "backup," I think it may be time to reconsider just how much that big payday was worth. Some stats worth looking at:

Career Playoff Stats:

Kipper: 23 wins, 24 losses, 0.460 winning % in 50 games, has played past the first round once.

Roli: 18 wins, 12 losses, 0.545 winning % in 33 games, has played games past the first round three times, twice in the final, once in the third round.

Pretty clear to me which goalie has the better playoff pedigree. Regular season success means very little if it can't be translated into the playoffs.
Posted by: JephC | Saturday October 11, 2008, 4:10 pm ET
And swash, no, Garon is, but I don't mind having Roli or Deslauriers as a backup. Sure, Roloson was inconsistent for a good part of last season, but down the stretch he played some brilliant games for us. Salary wise, people like to laugh at our backup making as much as he does, but look at it this way; combine our two main goaltenders salaries, and they still make less than Kiprusoff...what seems to be a better deal? Two decent goalies, one with strong playoff experience or paying more for one goalie who had one outstanding year followed by a consistent drop in performance since and little playoff success?

And for the record, people look too much at Garon's history as not landing a number 1 position. In Montreal, he was playing behind Theodore during Jose's Hart winning season, and in Los Angelos he was stuck behind a coach who for some reason had a real rubbery one for Dan Cloutier. Do you think the Kings would make that decision again?
Posted by: JephC | Saturday October 11, 2008, 4:16 pm ET
People also forget a couple things: remember, Roloson played the last two seasons behind a very suspect defense corp in Edmonton, a big difference between playing behind a corp with the likes of Phaneuf, Regehr, etc. Calgary has hyped its defence for the last couple seasons, so where does the blame for failures lie? On the goalie who has shown a history lately of letting in untimely garbage goals, or an expensive D unit that keeps getting hyped up as one of the top units in the league?
Posted by: JephC | Saturday October 11, 2008, 4:21 pm ET
To add to your point JephC, When the forwards want to cheat and aren't making the effort to play defence, they certainly can take some of the blame.

I agree, Garon is the starter, but from what I've seen of Deslauries, at his price, age and upside, he's the number 2. There's no way they lose him, to keep Roloson at 38 and at his salary, to play back-up......If you think Roloson(who I think will lose his job to Deslauries)is a better goalie than Kipper than good for you.....But,I don't swallow it.

As for Kipper....The people that don't believe, look for his failure......The people that do, aren't surprised to see him steal a game either.
Posted by: swash | Saturday October 11, 2008, 5:48 pm ET
I'm not saying Roli is a better goalie, swash, just that he's not as bad as people seem to think. And I don't think anyone's surprised to see Kipper steal a game; he is a former vezina winner, afterall. The surprise is that those games are becoming fewer and fewer, and the soft goals are steadily increasing. It's not so much as looking at it as watching for failure, but watching from an outsider's perspective and not the red goggles.

Is Kipper better than Roloson? Statistically, yes, but he's also played for much stronger teams than Roloson. All you need to do is look at Roloson's performance when he was with a strong defensive minded team in Minnesota, where he played two seasons with 48+ games, drawing a GAA of 2.00 and 1.88. Look at the performance in the 05-06 playoffs with a strong defensive corp.

And again, playoffs is where it counts, and those stats speak more for Roloson than Kiprusoff. Experience and winning % are a strong argument.

Roloson has shown in his career many times that when his team needs a big game, he's there. Again, last year's stretch drive, after Garon went down, Roli nearly got us back in, in particular with a dominating performace against San Jose.

As for Roli, it is time for him to likely move on, but honestly, he'll probably retire after this season. As well, Deslauriers won't likely get picked up on waivers, as in order to do so, another team would be put into the same spot as Edmonton, with three goaltenders. If they try to send him down, we automatically get the first crack at claiming him back. And salary isn't an issue. We're almost 3 million under the cap, so it won't come into play. And I don't think you've seen much of Deslauriers..does he have potential? Yes, but two games of ok preseason play don't even out a few seasons of below expectation play in the minors. Roli will be number two until he's traded. Count on it.
Posted by: JephC | Saturday October 11, 2008, 9:00 pm ET
Okay who is going to be ran out of Calgary first? Keenan or Kipper? personaly I would keep Kipper!
Posted by: RaySUCKS | Sunday October 12, 2008, 1:17 am ET
why call out a goalie when the season hasn't started, anything could change right away and kipper gets 10 shutouts in the regular season or gets under 2.30 for a GAA and calgary could go deep into the playoffs.
Posted by: boston142 | Sunday October 12, 2008, 10:47 am ET
You know I watched the home at home and I saw that the flames could out class a timbits team. Oh yeah way to go Tod let your team down again. See Tod needs to be sent down to the minors for a few games and when he is down there he should be benched. He knows he is a marked player for what he did in Van so why hasn't he changed his play. Like Kelly said you can still hit the guy but make sure you see the Logo first. I myself am a ABC fan (Anybody but Calgary) I used to lie there and when they went to the cup finals I was the only guy in the bar with the Hab jersey on. And what was the comentators doing last night Calgary this Calgary that look what the Canucks did. Canucks proved so far they the better team go back to preseason 6-0-1 and 2-0-0 looks like to me that the Canucks are proving all the hockey guys wrong. *GO Canucks GO*
Posted by: spruceking | Sunday October 12, 2008, 12:03 pm ET

your wrong but yes kipper is having bad times but as i say you never know whats gonna happen. especially in hockey.

Posted by: boston142 | Sunday October 12, 2008, 5:05 pm ET
Surprised Kipper is getting so much flack. I am a bit concerned after last season, but that is it. He really only had 1 bad season. As Arloiginla pointed out, the "decline" from 03-04 to 05-06 was due to the new rules, and he won the Vezina that year. In 06-07, his numbers went down, but it would have been damn near impossible for them to go up (or even stay the same - seasons like that are few and far between for anyone), and he still managed to be nominated for the Vezina. His playoff performance in 06-07 was phenomenal. Really, the only question is whether he bounces back after an inconsistent season in 07-08. Obviously there is always the worry he won't. But all this talk about him melting down, etc. is a bit much and is based on 1 bad season. I think it's a bit premature for people to be so confident that a guy of his ability will fail.
Posted by: diobrain | Sunday October 12, 2008, 5:47 pm ET
Kippers declining #'s correspond to the decline in the quality of Calgary's Dmen. You've got one top 4 Nhl calibre D man + it ain't Celine. Dion will be one day but right now he's an overpaid pylon who needs to seriously improve his defensive game. Sutter needs to improve his D, + give Kipper support vs giving him a D that consistently hangs him out to dry.
Posted by: canuklelions | Sunday October 12, 2008, 6:14 pm ET
diobrain: true enough, but he's only really had one outstanding season as well. I don't think he's going to fail the Flames; his natural ability will keep him as a number one still, but he hasn't played at the same level that won him the Vezina since. And with a team priding itself on strong defensive play under the Sutter system, it should be a worry among Flames' fans. The other problem is that the Flames don't have a strong backup. It's basically like having a number 1 and number 3 goalie, much the same as Vancouver had with Luigi after Noronen left.

Either way, happy to see the Flames stumbling out of the starting block.
Posted by: JephC | Sunday October 12, 2008, 7:33 pm ET
Garon: 1, Kipper: 0.

Boy, that first star performance feels particularly sweet right about now! ;)
Posted by: JephC | Sunday October 12, 2008, 11:21 pm ET
Last years stretch drive......... lol, you crack me up JephC.

The Oilers had a stretch drive just like the Leafs have stretch drives as of late. They find themselves out of contention by the All-Star break, no longer feel the pressure, and start playing better. By the time they start winning it's too late anyways. and sure it's great for their foolish fans who need hope to cling to, but it means absolutely in the end. If they can have a great run and go from 8th to 3rd (take the division for the slow ones out there) ,in the last 20 games, then you can talk about stretch drives.

As for Rolie winning a series beyond the first round.... Aside from the Cheechoo save the second round was a combo of the Oilers playing incredibly and the Sharks melting down. The Ducks series was again, in my opinion, more of the team playing well then Rolie stealing the show. Case and point, he goes down and Jussi (he played great considering the situation) takes them to 7 games? I'd say that was more team play than goaltending.

Lastly you may not wear red goggles but with the ones you do have one I'm surprised you can see through the oil covering the lenses.
Posted by: Keevs | Monday October 13, 2008, 2:38 am ET
Keevs: When you go 14-5-1 in your final 20 games without your number 1 center, number 1 goaltender, number 1 defenseman, team captain..yeah, I call that a pretty impressive stretch drive considering our number one line was made up of two rookies and a guy still finding his niche in the NHL.

Much more impressive, you would have to admit, then going 10-8-2 down that same stretch, with a perennial all-star, former Vezina winner and Norris candidate, finishing 6 points up on a team filled with little more than kids, only to commit yet another first round choke act.

Or than a team that had a playoff spot within reach, only to choke out down that same stretch and finish below the Oilers in the standings, like the Canucks managed.

Look at it how you like, my friend. But in the end, our kids were dominating the NHL at the end of last year, something that bodes well for us with our starters back and healthy this year. All I need to say is this; Oilers 1-0, Flames 0-1-1. I like those Oil covered glasses right now.
Posted by: JephC | Monday October 13, 2008, 12:28 pm ET
And what's more foolish; being a fan cheering and rooting for a talented group of youth overextending themselves in what could have easily been a wash for a year of rebuilding, or being a blinded fan cheering for a team filled with award winners and superstar candidate defensemen that year in and year out fold up under pressure, barely manage to squeeze in, before cracking again and going out in the first round? AT least my team has been making strides towards improvement. The Flames? Same old same old every year. Ride Iggy and Kipper, resign the same tired bodies like Regehr, and keep playing the same inconsistent hockey that keeps them from ever actually taking a real step forward.

Flames have declined in points and wins every year since their run. Yup. They're a dominating team, for sure. Thank God my glasses are slick and not red.
Posted by: JephC | Monday October 13, 2008, 12:32 pm ET
Pretty cocky some of you people after only two games... Might see a different tune in April..

Not hard to say "great blog" to a guy that probably wears Oilers boxers to bed.. lol
Posted by: ozzy27 | Monday October 13, 2008, 4:15 pm ET
Heh, I find it oustanding how much some of you guys will let a rivalry get in the way of common hockey Sense.

I bleed copper and blue, but talking all this crap after the flames let go of two games? Come on. Let's face it, we haven't had anything to brag about... sure, we had a great stretch drive, but we still didn't make the playoffs. Where was that great play earlier in the season? Nowhere to be seen. And our first game of the season sure as hell wasn't anything to brag about.

Flames fans? Wouldn't be bragging either. Let's face it, you made it to the playoffs, but you only WON one more game than the Oil. That's one lucky bounce between you and your rivals... you REALLY comfortable with that? 4 of the 6 points seperating the Oil and the Flames came from the Flames LOSING in extra time. LOSING. Not winning. Congrats, you're more succsesful at losing than the Oil... and even then it was just a first round choke job all over again.

I say we just sit back and watch some Hockey. The rivalry is something I enjoy as much as the next guy.. but as far as I can tell neither side has a leg to stand on SO FAR.
Posted by: GLoKz0r | Monday October 13, 2008, 6:19 pm ET
I'll take da Kippa any day.

Really Dude. Sheesh You're sort of Francising it up aren't you?
Posted by: OilersChick | Monday October 13, 2008, 11:20 pm ET
Ya...I know Ozzy27, I hear ya.

But 2 games don't lie.

Stats clearly state that Kippers days are numbered.....I guess when other teams make their western swing, the Flames will have to expect to face the back-up goalie....Leave the stud to play the really good teams in Vancouver and Edmonton.

Sure this team may have a few Award winners and Superstar candidates, but who would be blind enough to root for them?....It's certainly nothing to be proud of....The rest are a bunch of fourth liners and 6th defenceman that don't play with heart....Bertuzzi?..OK..He can't play physical......2 games and stats and expert opinion prove, the Flames should be easy to beat for the next 80.

So there you have it Oilers Fans....Some of the comments are out of your mouths....No excuses for you this year.
Posted by: swash | Tuesday October 14, 2008, 12:20 am ET
You must be logged in to add a comment. Click here to log in now.
Extra! Extra!

Sportsnet Connected
06:30 AM - 07:00 AM

Sportsnet Connected
07:00 AM - 07:30 AM
Home About Sportsnet FAQ Press Releases Privacy Policy Terms of Use
Copyright 2008 Rogers Sportsnet. All Rights Reserved.

Rogers Digital Media Television