Ex-Islanders Campoli, Comrie happy to be Senators

Busey wrote:

<quoted text>
Don't they each have 4?

Yeah you have 4 in 100 years we have 4 in 30 years. I know...it hurts. So when the rags get wiped out of the playoffs and Torture-ella gets fired how long do you think it will take the hire Messygay as coach?

Busey: Dunham took over after Dipetro got hurt that year. He was simply awful!

Jay wrote:

Easy...
I-N-J-U-R-Y P-L-A-G-U-E-D S-E-A-S-O-N!
Ta-da!
<quoted text>

Keep crying, Jay. Fact is lack of talent is what makes the Islanders a last place team. Plus the fans. They do not bathe.

Ronkonkoma Rag Fan wrote:

<quoted text>
And your rags will be there a week later so **** F up D bag!
Only thing is after this seazson we will have Tavares!

You will not get him in the lottery, because you are jinxed. But if you did, he would demand to be traded. That's what he told me. Ha, Ha on you!

4therecord wrote:

Busey: Dunham took over after Dipetro got hurt that year. He was simply awful!

Ricky D is like the worst goalie ever dude.

4darecord wrote:

<quoted text>
Ricky D is like the worst goalie ever dude.

Except Henrik when's he having an "off day" Granted Henrik is flat out awesome when he is on. He often has those 5 games spells where he's swiss cheese.

Ronkonkoma Rag Fan wrote:

<quoted text>
Yeah you have 4 in 100 years we have 4 in 30 years. I know...it hurts. So when the rags get wiped out of the playoffs and Torture-ella gets fired how long do you think it will take the hire Messygay as coach?

So what? You said counting cups...

They each have 4..its a fact.

Either that, or you suck at counting

4therecord wrote:

Busey: Dunham took over after Dipetro got hurt that year. He was simply awful!

only for a bit...he sucked and Dubie came in and played great...

Plus, DP is the definition of average..so not having him isn't exactly a big deal

Tavares wrote:

Hey, Islander fans. Wanted to introduce myself and say that I don't want to play for the fish. Thank you.

you are such an ass cant even give your real name

Dino wrote:

<quoted text>
Keep crying, Jay. Fact is lack of talent is what makes the Islanders a last place team. Plus the fans. They do not bathe.

no, what makes the islanders a last place team is learning a new system with very young players and a new coach and what the hell is the comment on bathing for. you are such a ass

Secret Agent wrote:

<quoted text>
You will not get him in the lottery, because you are jinxed. But if you did, he would demand to be traded. That's what he told me. Ha, Ha on you!

more like secret agent ass

the truth wrote:

<quoted text>
Hate to break it to the Rag fans but Taveras made it very darn clear that he'd be PROUD to be a New York Islander or any team that drafted him. He appreciates the idea of playing in the NHL, the honor of playing in such a league and not the glitz and selfishness of a Lindros John Taveras is a class act you know unlike the guys across the River.
By the way I rather be in last place then 7-8th place with another first round ouster.

yes someone who follows what is going on the truth makes everyone else who talks trash look like asses

Busey wrote:

<quoted text>
That, in a nutshell, is why Isles fans are pathetic.

Sorry we're not all high and mighty like you. Since all we seem to be is pathetic and all you seem to do is point that out... Why not do everyone a favor and stop posting then d i c k! Go back to your wonderful Rangers forum.

the truth wrote:

<quoted text>
Why short term pain long term gain. You could be the team that either just misses or just gets into the playoffs every year and then gets eliminated. Thus not winning anything nor getting the draft picks necessary to build OR you could be the team that builds youth and then competes like the Penguins and the Capitals. Ranger fans have ONE really reliable player on their team and his name is King Henrik. The rest are the overated faux stars that other teams are not foolish enough to over pay for. The Rangers have won one cup in the era of hockey that actually matters. The other three coming before the attack on Pearl Harbor in an era where there were six teams. Thus statistically they had to win a few, and even then they only got 3 in a period that lasted from the 1920's until 1967. Then when the league actually expanded and got competitive, they and their original six brethren other then the Habs and Red Wings, have never been able to really compete. Sans the Oilers East in 1994.

Let the truth be told- It was far more difficult to win a stanley cup in a 6 team league then it is today- Yes, it's still difficult but deinitely tougher back in the day- Chicago, Detroit, Toronto and Boston haven't seen many championships in recent years either- The best hockey players came from within 200 miles of Montreal and the Canadiens had the rights to every one of them, therefore they always had the best teams and won most of the championships- Don't believe in home ice advantage...there were many times when the Rangers were good enough to make the playoffs but never played a home game in a seven game series because of scheduling conflicts at Madison Square Garden - The odds were against the Rangers as well as the other 5 teams- After expansion the league started to get watered down and there were more teams getting into the playoffs- Yes, now you have to win 16 games and back then only 8, but getting into the playoffs was tougher-

Real truth wrote:

<quoted text>
Let the truth be told- It was far more difficult to win a stanley cup in a 6 team league then it is today- Yes, it's still difficult but deinitely tougher back in the day- Chicago, Detroit, Toronto and Boston haven't seen many championships in recent years either- The best hockey players came from within 200 miles of Montreal and the Canadiens had the rights to every one of them, therefore they always had the best teams and won most of the championships- Don't believe in home ice advantage...there were many times when the Rangers were good enough to make the playoffs but never played a home game in a seven game series because of scheduling conflicts at Madison Square Garden - The odds were against the Rangers as well as the other 5 teams- After expansion the league started to get watered down and there were more teams getting into the playoffs- Yes, now you have to win 16 games and back then only 8, but getting into the playoffs was tougher-

This is the real truth REAL TRUTH-

Real truth wrote:

<quoted text>
Let the truth be told- It was far more difficult to win a stanley cup in a 6 team league then it is today- Yes, it's still difficult but deinitely tougher back in the day- Chicago, Detroit, Toronto and Boston haven't seen many championships in recent years either- The best hockey players came from within 200 miles of Montreal and the Canadiens had the rights to every one of them, therefore they always had the best teams and won most of the championships- Don't believe in home ice advantage...there were many times when the Rangers were good enough to make the playoffs but never played a home game in a seven game series because of scheduling conflicts at Madison Square Garden - The odds were against the Rangers as well as the other 5 teams- After expansion the league started to get watered down and there were more teams getting into the playoffs- Yes, now you have to win 16 games and back then only 8, but getting into the playoffs was tougher-

Numbers are numbers There are 30 teams now there were 6 then. It is still harder to win today when the talent is spread through 30 different teams. And the Rangers who traditionally had more money and resources in what you say is an easier era to win a cup, still can't manage to be successful other then 94.