Runnin' With the Dogs

>You may have forgotten that RWD exists. You may have forgotten the laughter, the tears, the unchecked rage. But, because I am not above the cheesy “clip show” style post, here are

The Top Ten RWD Posts Of All Time Until Better Ones Come Along

10. UMD Announces New Assistant Coach
9. No Joy in Mudville
8. The Gauntlet: Public Servant Edition
7. Diamonds and Pucks
6. The Teddy Bear Affair
5. 100 Years Behind the Mask
4. When You Say Wisconsin, You’ve Said Too Much
3. The Gauntlet: Denver Edition
2. Save the Children
1. Fearing the Reaper

You know you love it.

>We interrupt your regularly scheduled non-update with an actual entry. Sorry for the convenience.

Via my dear friend Goon’s blog, I discovered this article by Fighting Sioux beat writer Brad Schlossman (also known as That Rat Bastard That Doesn’t Link To Me) discussing Brian Lee’s departure from the Fighting Sioux.

Okay, I may not exactly have my finger on the pulse of college hockey, but seriously, what the mother is going on over in Grand Forks?

Let me give you an example of what some lovely folks are saying about Brian (spelling and grammar are the authors’s own):
“hes a fugly dude and see yaaaaaaaaaaa” (Okay, in the photo on Goon’s site, he does look like he’s wearing purple lipstick and yellow eyeliner, but jeez.)
“he peaked very early around 15/16 and has been the same player since, maybe the ahl will help him more but he will get his ass kicked for sure if he prances around the ice like he did sometimes”
“he isnt ready for the next level, he just wanted to get out of school for sure, he wasnt well liked in the locker room, that happens sometimes, he had a HUGE ego and head around grand forks so that didnt help him at all which is his fault for being a jackass to regular old fans”
“I wish Brian well, but am not sorry to see him go. I would not characterize Brian as a UND standout. Ever since he was chosen to participate in the first World Juniors, people’s perceptions of Brian’s abilities exceeded his subsequent play – his performance seldom justified his ‘reputation’. Brian too often coasts (skate-coast, skate-coast) – doesn’t seem to have the fire/drive/passion required to be REALLY successful at the D1 (not to mention NHL) level. Part of Brian’s legacy at UND will forever be the ‘Blake Wheeler goal.'”
“A few years in the minors and a few fights will be good for Brian, who was one of the softest players ever to wear the kelly green.”
“I’m sure he is a nice guy, however I fealt like he was a liability to the team when he was on the ice. To be fair I had felt the same about Finley at one point and time, but Finley has shown improvement throughout his career at UND. The first half of the year we had a better record with Foyt playing D then we did with Lee.”
“Lee played like a poke-checking prima donna on more shifts than not for 2 years. He rarely went into the corner first, but was happy to ‘punish’ a braver forward if he thought he could get away with it…usually followed by a boarding/elbowing/roughing call.”
“Lee is going to get lit up like a real life version of ‘Youngblood’ without the triumphant return to the team after his 2 years.” (This person actually wrote a series of short stories entitled The Chronicles of Lee and posted the entire thing on Brad’s site.)

All right, then. To be fair, there were certainly posts defending Brian and wishing him well, and there were some that were at least constructive in their criticism, but I have been a member of the SiouxSports board for a long time, and I’m pretty shocked at some of the things people would say about the poor guy (and about Joe Finley). I guess as long as there are players, there will be critics, but there is a line that people have crossed, that I have only crossed in discussion of 1. Those horrible people from St. Cloud 2. The New York Yankees 3. Troy Riddle and Ryan Potulny. I’ve been critical of my ‘Dogs from time to time, but never to the point where I have wished someone would go away and then publicly repeated that over and over again. And really, after the past 2 seasons we’ve had, I could probably be more critical, if not for two reasons: I’m not close enough to the game to comment on a day-in, day-out basis, and I just don’t want to say anything really mean about any of those guys. I mean, the HSWCHA does exist, but I haven’t put anyone in it in a long time. I didn’t even get mad when Nisky scored on Johnson down in Mankato. I just felt bad for him.

I think Goon is right when he says we’ve lost our civility. I mean, it’s one thing to scream “You m-fing something or other” at a hockey game where everyone can see you (because really, I’m not above doing that), but it’s another thing to go on the internet under some silly made-up name and take your frustration with the world out on some guy who made a mistake. Come on, people. Get a grip.

>

Recently, just for you, my dear comrades, I read Ross Bernstein’s The Code.

Let me preface this entry by saying, if you are looking for an eloquent, well-written account of the role of the enforcer in the NHL, you will not find it in this book. If you are an English professor or a Pulitzer Prize winner, you will cringe in horror. Any book that uses the phrase “by virtue of the fact that” is not well-written, in my opinion. AND MY OPINION IS THE ONLY ONE THAT MATTERS. Learn it, live it. However, I am a fascist when it comes to grammar and usage and concise writing, so the rest of you might not suffer as I did.

Caveat before we get this party started: the book, sadly, does not have an index. I’m only going to look up the important stuff, so if I start talking vaguely on a subject, curse the missing index, not the writer. Curse me, too, if you like. I’m cool.

Now that I have taken care of business, I will say the book had good information about the hockey enforcer and the code. If you are not a literature snob (or if you are, but are simultaneously a hockey freak), I would certainly suggest reading it. There are multitudes of interviews from enforcers of the past and present era, which I feel adds the most value to the book. I was afraid, considering Bernstein is a Minnesota resident (and I’m sure he’s a Gopher fan), the book would contain a little too much homer-ism, but I felt like the Minnesota references weren’t overpowering. If you read the book through a homeristic lens (w00t! I invented a word!), you will find traces of a bias. Obviously, a book about fighting can’t exclude Basil McRae, Shane Churla, and a passing mention of Derek Boogaard (only passing because I believe you can’t write definitively about the present situation), but there certainly are hints of Gopherism. There are quotations from One-Eyed Sonmor (yes, yes, I know, he was also a North Stars player and coach, and he is mentioned in the chapter on visors and face shields, which is totally relevant), Lou Nanne (who argues against fighting in the NHL. Not surprising.), and Neal Broten, but I can deal. Former Bulldog Brett Hull is also interviewed, so that gives a little balance.

I certainly enjoyed the interview with NHL and WCHA alumnus Mike Peluso, who straight up made me laugh. I rarely laugh audibly when reading, but when Mike started talking about the “football numbers,” the high jersey numbers given to training camp invitees, I was chuckling to myself. I was roaring when I read parts of the interview with Paul Stewart, who describes chasing Bob Schmautz with a putter during a celebrity golf tournament, in an attempt to avenge an incident years prior where Schmautz tried to spear Stewart in the eye. Stewart actually called out Schmautz in his excerpt, which is comedy gold. Yes, I know, I am the lowest common denominator, I am what is wrong with the world today. Sue me, I was laughing.

Violence is never funny, kids.

Speaking of kids, toward the end, the book explores the message fighting sends to the children of players, youth hockey players, and young fans of the sport. The discussion forces Bernstein to backtrack on the previous sections of the book. At the beginning, the author almost reveres fighting, portraying fighters as the ultimate team players and heroes of sorts. Then, once he brings up the impact of fighting on children, Bernstein faces about and begins to sound like he opposes fighting. The change in tone leaves the reader unsure of the author’s actual viewpoint. It was like listening to a politician. Not to worry, because I still like fighting, and I’m pretty sure the author likes fighting, too, but not in youth hockey. I don’t want to see fighting in mini-mites, either. Those would be the shortest fights ever, since both parties would be flat on their faces seconds after trying to take a swing at the other. I paid for blood.

Back to my old pal Paul Stewart, I enjoyed what he had to say regarding the Bertuzzi Incident, as that melodrama is referred to in the book. Generally, I replace Incident with Sucker-Punch, but I don’t have to be diplomatic. Stewart implies Brad May (then with Vancouver, now with the Dirty Ducks) couldn’t hold a candle to Tie Domi (duh!) and flat-out calls Steve Moore (Bertuzzi’s victim, remember?) a “no-name.” I think Paul Stewart and I are kindred souls. Paul, call me, we’ll do lunch. On you.

It was informative to hear the players’ opinions on tBI, and it’s important for people to know the entire scope of the situation, stemming from Steve Moore’s hit on Markus Naslund that knocked Naslund unconscious (I hate Naslund) weeks before tBI occurred. I do have to laugh at the foreword and interviews with another player, Marty McSorley. McSorley channels the Klingon Empire with all his talk of duty, loyalty and, most of all, honor. Yet, there is a section in one of the chapters on the McSorley Incident, which the author calls one of “the two most notorious incidents” in the past three decades of hockey. (The other incident is the aforementioned Bertuzzi Incident, but if I had to tell you that, I fear for your future.) Oh, Marty, there is no honor in sticking Brashear in the face. What Would Worf Do?

(photo courtesy of TSN, obvs.)

(Granted, I would like to hit Brashear with my stick, too, but I wouldn’t hit him in the face, for crying out loud, and I would come out and say “Hell yeah I did it, he had it coming!”) When there is an entire Incident (capital I!) named after you, your integrity is a bit questionable.

I suppose my biggest problem with the book is, it could have been written in about one-third as many pages. A lot of the information is repetitive. For example, in the chapter “What Prompts Dropping the Gloves?,” Bernstein lists “the top ten reasons gloves are dropped in professional hockey.” I do realize 10 is a nice, round number, and its paralleling Letterman’s lists, but “Bad Blood,” “Retaliation and Retribution,” and “Sending a Message” could all be covered in the same paragraph, as could “Intimidation” and “Deterrence.” I get the concept of the code. I got it beforehand, and I certainly could not forget it now. The book repeats itself so many times, you could be so dumb that only Texas would execute you, and you would still understand the concept after reading this book (or having the book read to you, if you were really that dumb.)

Bottom Line: Read it for the anecdotes, read it for the inside information. It’s worth it, and you’ll enjoy watching hockey even more.