NHL Thread: 2021-2022 Season

[drew]

Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN

Listening to sports talking heads is a real chore these days. The talented Oilers are stiffed by the refs who allow the less talented Jets to maul and abuse McJesus.

Give me a fucking break, you don't think Ehlers, Conners, and company have talent? Screw you Sportsnet, just because your ratings buster team-up doesn't happen doesn't mean that the Jets are more than deserving to get to the next round!

On paper the Jets and Oilers were fairly evenly matched, I would even give Winnipeg the advantage based on overall team depth.

The only thing that made this series "appear" to be some sort of colossal upset was the season series, where the Oilers beat up on the Jets. Although again, a lot of those games were close.

The Jets winning the series is not surprising to me. Sweeping the Oilers was surprising, but that's it.

Sportsnet/CBC and their terrible commentators with obvious pro-Oilers bias throughout the short series was nauseating.

It's only going to continue for the next series, and ramp up a few notches assuming the Leafs make it through.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by JHikka

If you consider the NBA TNT panel of Shaq and Barkley then I guess Gretzky isn't too surprising. I guess the question is who he's paired with and if they have any chemistry whatsoever. Can't be any worse than what NBC hobbled around with for a decade.

My comment was mostly on Gretzky's inability to coach and manage. Obviously he was a fantastic player but sometimes it doesn't translate to any other part of the game. I guess we'll see if he can provide some sort of analysis that's more than standard talking points that we can get from anyone else.

I don't know if it's just me but the TNT NBA panels are really refreshing because it's obvious the points aren't scripted - they genuinely talk about and analyze the game on the fly. Watch any hockey broadcast and it's cut to person for their one sentence, cut to person for their one sentence, cut to person for their one sentence. What's the point of having a desk or panel if there's no interaction between the panelists? Incredibly dull. I can't remember the last time there was any debate between people on a hockey broadcast.

I don't watch much NBA at all, but ooh that lady is SOLID.

In terms of hockey, the guys in French on RDS and TVA Sports definitely debate and even argue on occasion. Though it's very good-natured and they're obviously all buddies.

This NBA discussion had a bit of a malaise going through it.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by esquire

Gretzky was so mind-blowingly good at what he did it doesn't matter if he never accomplishes another thing for the rest of his life, he is still light years ahead of nearly everyone else! I do not begrudge him a life of cracking open cold ones at 8 am or whatever he wants to do... he has certainly earned it.

I just thought it was a bit surprising that with his personality TNT would go after him. Gretzky is no Charles Barkley, that's for damn sure. I guess TNT is mainly interested in the name recognition factor... I suppose they can coach him up on being a talking head and limit the amount of stuff he actually says.

Wayne Gretzky retired over 20 years ago. You'd think that as the greatest player ever (arguably), if he had any potential to be a good broadcaster or analyst someone would have offered him a job before now.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by thurmas

Since Grapes left I have found HNIC intermission broadcasts incredibly dull and bland and they all seem too afraid to say anything colorful or controversial. They need like a Jay Onrait or somebody to make it more fun and not so boring.

I can see that and might agree, but I don't see what random comments about dudes' masculinity or orientation, or slags about ethno-cultural groups, bring to a hockey broadcast.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by JHikka

How else could you possibly interpret his remarks? It was very obviously a joke about gays/AIDS.

The thing with Cherry was that everyone already knew he was racist so when he said racist things it wasn't really that much of a shock. MacLean's attempted slyness at making a homophobic joke feels so much worse by comparison.

Enlightening that he decides to make a comment like that in what is probably the biggest series for Canadian TV since Vancouver's Finals a decade ago.

I've always found Ron MacLean to be quite representative of a certain Canadian persona. Generally good-natured and even-tempered, but not nearly as wholesomely nice deep down as he appears to be to everyone on the surface. Quite passive-aggressive too.

[thurmas]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I can see that and might agree, but I don't see what random comments about dudes' masculinity or orientation, or slags about ethno-cultural groups, bring to a hockey broadcast.

I agree grapes was a dinosaur but its gone too far the other way they need some modern colorful personalities like Jay and Dan

[drew]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I've always found Ron MacLean to be quite representative of a certain Canadian persona. Generally good-natured and even-tempered, but not nearly as wholesomely nice deep down as he appears to be to everyone on the surface. Quite passive-aggressive too.

I think that the addition of Bieksa in that panel has thrown MacLean off his game a bit.

From what I have watched of it (admittingly not a lot until the playoffs) Bieksa is laid back, somewhat entertaining and throws out some zingers here and there. It seems like MacLean is trying too hard to keep up, or at least maintain his "alpha" role on the segment.

This latest quip was MacLean trying too hard to put a quick zinger on Bieksa that obviously backfired.

[esquire]

I didn't see it, so this thread made me go back and watch the clip of MacLean with Bieksa and I honestly cannot make sense of what MacLean was getting at. "positive for something"... what exactly? I'm assuming steroids... a guy like MacLean has too much savoir faire to make a gay joke on air, right???

I liked your analysis of the dynamics, drew.

Personally I am not really a fan of any panel that Sportsnet and before that CBC assembled. Remember that time I think it was earlier this season when David Amber made a gentle but awkward joke to Brian Burke about the colour of his Olympic medal and Burke just gave it to him? Awkward, and as viewer I don't like awkward. This MacLean/Bieksa thing was awkward. I wish they'd stop being so fucking awkward.

[HomeInMyShoes]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Wayne Gretzky retired over 20 years ago. You'd think that as the greatest player ever (arguably), if he had any potential to be a good broadcaster or analyst someone would have offered him a job before now.

I would agree with that. He's just not that colourful on camera. He had more character as a player than as a retiree. What we need to bring on is Roberto Luongo and Teemu Selanne as broadcasters.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I don't watch much NBA at all, but ooh that lady is SOLID.

Parker's phoenomenal. Always enjoy listening to her.

Originally Posted by Acajack

In terms of hockey, the guys in French on RDS and TVA Sports definitely debate and even argue on occasion. Though it's very good-natured and they're obviously all buddies.

I know L'Antichambre is, like, that panel type show that discusses Habs games afterwards, but that's more of a post-game thing than a during-the-broadcast thing. It definitely had this Old Boys Club feel but I think they've had women on in recent years? I haven't watched it in a while.

Originally Posted by Acajack

I've always found Ron MacLean to be quite representative of a certain Canadian persona. Generally good-natured and even-tempered, but not nearly as wholesomely nice deep down as he appears to be to everyone on the surface. Quite passive-aggressive too.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by thurmas

I agree grapes was a dinosaur but its gone too far the other way they need some modern colorful personalities like Jay and Dan

The Jay & Dan, now just Jay, schtick grew pretty tiresome pretty quickly. Was funny at first but just feels very forced now.

Originally Posted by drew

I think that the addition of Bieksa in that panel has thrown MacLean off his game a bit.

Bieksa's probably the best analyst that SN/CBC have had in quite a long time. I can't think of the last analyst i've liked as much on either property. TSN has a few quasi-analyst 'insiders' but Mike Johnson is the one player analyst that I quite like on that end (Miller and Johnson doing World Championship games this week from Latvia has been very nice). I thought Matt Stajan on Flames broadcasts was good, too. Just, like, offer your opinion in a natural way and not like you're reading it off the teleprompter.

Originally Posted by esquire

I didn't see it, so this thread made me go back and watch the clip of MacLean with Bieksa and I honestly cannot make sense of what MacLean was getting at. "positive for something"... what exactly? I'm assuming steroids... a guy like MacLean has too much savoir faire to make a gay joke on air, right???

"If you have [a picture of a guy with his shirt off] then you're positive for something" can only really mean one thing. At best it's a jab at Bieksa being gay and at worst it's a jab at AIDS? Either way, dismal.

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by esquire

I didn't see it, so this thread made me go back and watch the clip of MacLean with Bieksa and I honestly cannot make sense of what MacLean was getting at. "positive for something"... what exactly? I'm assuming steroids... a guy like MacLean has too much savoir faire to make a gay joke on air, right???

I liked your analysis of the dynamics, drew.

Personally I am not really a fan of any panel that Sportsnet and before that CBC assembled. Remember that time I think it was earlier this season when David Amber made a gentle but awkward joke to Brian Burke about the colour of his Olympic medal and Burke just gave it to him? Awkward, and as viewer I don't like awkward. This MacLean/Bieksa thing was awkward. I wish they'd stop being so fucking awkward.

There's a reason I put the TV on mute and wander into the kitchen and take care of other things during the intermission.

At least they're not in baseball, I guess? There's so much dead air in baseball to fill, so commentators that don't have the right vibe are brutal to listen to.

When I'm at the point of thinking I'd prefer commercials to the filler, it's bad.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by JHikka

I know L'Antichambre is, like, that panel type show that discusses Habs games afterwards, but that's more of a post-game thing than a during-the-broadcast thing. It definitely had this Old Boys Club feel but I think they've had women on in recent years? I haven't watched it in a while.

.

Yeah, Chantal Macchabée is pretty much a regular on there and they've had other women on there very *sporadically* I recall.

There are also suppertime pre-game analysis and preview shows on both RDS and TVA Sports, and women are part of the crew as well IIRC.

[Djeffery]

Lovin some of the talk on Twitter regarding Gretzky going to TNT, and wondering who they are going to bring in with him. And then the comparisons with Shaq and Charles start. I don't know what TNT's expectations are, but I suspect NHL coverage is going to be pretty boring by comparison lol

• Video Link

[thurmas]

Double Dion? MMMMONSTERS did someone say Pierre McGuire?

[Coldrsx]

Habs!!!!!!

[Acajack]

YES! Gutsy!

[theman23]

Pewee league plays by Galchenyuk and Sandin, but more than that where were Marner and Matthews?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by theman23

Pewee league plays by Galchenyuk and Sandin, but more than that where were Marner and Matthews?

During the intermission before overtime on TVA Sports, Michel Bergeron spoke of Matthews by saying "beware of the sleeping bear".

Not tonight I guess.

Maybe Saturday.

[Coldrsx]

Golfin' with Connor and Drai thee be.

[thurmas]

Just wear each other down guys so you will be easier for the Jets to beat