Page 2 of 3
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 1:40 pm
by rayfinkel
Can't Never Tried wrote:I won't hand out any hint's
But we'll just have to see what happens.
I just love when people get so cocky and make statements like that....
They all put the gear on the same way pal.... determination and hard work and a bunch of people saying you can't, is just the right motivation an underdog needs......... so keep pouring it on...Rogers has heard this stuff for years and are uneffected by it.
Go Royals!
I agree Hard Work Beats Talent! So if Rogers comes out and works harder than Blaine, anything can happen.
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 1:50 pm
by EREmpireStrikesBack
rayfinkel wrote:Can't Never Tried wrote:I won't hand out any hint's
But we'll just have to see what happens.
I just love when people get so cocky and make statements like that....
They all put the gear on the same way pal.... determination and hard work and a bunch of people saying you can't, is just the right motivation an underdog needs......... so keep pouring it on...Rogers has heard this stuff for years and are uneffected by it.
Go Royals!
I agree Hard Work Beats Talent! So if Rogers comes out and works harder than Blaine, anything can happen.
Shades of ER anyone?
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:55 pm
by breakout
Rogers will not beat Blaine. Blaine is too good of a team.
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 4:09 pm
by BIGSEXY
TomTheBomb wrote:
Zippy called it right. No way Blaine scores more than maybe 3 on the Royals.
How much $ you got on that? Bottom line is Rogers had a very tough time with CP and I'm not sure they weren't outplayed. You have to give them credit as they did work very hard last night and were rewarded with a good win for the program, but Champlin is a very poor team and did not appear to even be skating hard until the last 5 minutes where they had multiple chances. Blaine is bigger, stronger and faster (but so were the Soviets
). Rogers is simply a good class A team and can't stick with Blaine. Saying that, weirder things have happened and you never know.
Give me...
Blaine 5
Rogers 2
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 4:20 pm
by Stealth
Blaine 7
Rogers 1
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 5:41 pm
by gmoola89
personally. im a centennial fan myself, but thats beyond the point. would it be cool to see blaine lose to rogers? yes. is it going to happen? no. blaine is too good of a team to lose to rogers, they just are straight up more talented and i do not believe that they will take them lightly.
i go blaine. 7-3
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 5:51 pm
by TomTheBomb
BIGSEXY wrote:How much $ you got on that?
I don't know, $5.00? Did you see the Rogers/Champlin Park game? Either you didn't, or you had a pretty hardcore bias opinion of the game, BigUgly. I'm not going to say Rogers outplayed the Rebels completely, but what you are trying to say is way out of bounds. Blaine has more depth, and if they win, that's where they will outlast the Royals. But you are foolish to have the W chalked up before the game has even started, with your bigger, faster, sexier Bengels. Have fun tomorrow.
p.s. Elliott he isn't a girl he just has sweet hair.
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 6:03 pm
by elliott70
I just thought Tommy and the K-man had something going on.
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 6:22 pm
by TomTheBomb
No.
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 10:21 pm
by EREmpireStrikesBack
I'll be there Tommy. Back in the cities tonight and will be headed over to The Forum for all the glorious action.
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 11:52 pm
by Can't Never Tried
Ok Royals here we go...come out and give it your best..this is just the challange you've been waiting for...so make the most of it.
And yes "The whole town's there pullin for ya" and of course CNT will be there rootin you on as well.
And just remember if ya have any doubts, just believe that ............."Can't Never Tried"
Go Royals!!
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 11:54 pm
by Zamboni Guy
In this one, I am thinking...
Blaine - 6
Rogers - 3
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 12:53 am
by EREmpireStrikesBack
Can't Never Tried wrote:Ok Royals here we go...come out and give it your best..this is just the challange you've been waiting for...so make the most of it.
And yes "The whole town's there pullin for ya" and of course CNT will be there rootin you on as well.
And just remember if ya have any doubts, just believe that ............."Can't Never Tried"
Go Royals!!
Where will ya be sittin' CNT?
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 2:14 am
by TomTheBomb
Another thing, what is the double header 2nd game?
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 3:26 pm
by Fanny13
The game after blaine is maple grove vs osseo.
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 3:30 pm
by BIGSEXY
TomTheBomb wrote:BIGSEXY wrote:How much $ you got on that?
I don't know, $5.00?
Blaine 4
Rogers 1
You have to give a lot of credit to Rogers as they really played hard as was to be expected. Kupka played a GREAT game in net. He stopped Beaudette on a breakaway and on a 3 on 1 pass from Lynch. They were able to hang on 7 minutes into the 3rd period until the Bengals scored two in a row. It is easy to see that they are a very well coached team, just couldn't stay with Blaine the whole way.
Keep up the good work Royals.
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:21 pm
by TomTheBomb
You're wanting to count the empty netter as a goal, aren't you? My statement was supposed to be referring to on Kupka, but whatever. I didn't clarify the fine print. You win and are way smarter than me.
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 6:12 pm
by northstar-hockey
BIGSEXY wrote:TomTheBomb wrote:BIGSEXY wrote:How much $ you got on that?
I don't know, $5.00?
Blaine 4
Rogers 1
You have to give a lot of credit to Rogers as they really played hard as was to be expected. Kupka played a GREAT game in net. He stopped Beaudette on a breakaway and on a 3 on 1 pass from Lynch. They were able to hang on 7 minutes into the 3rd period until the Bengals scored two in a row. It is easy to see that they are a very well coached team, just couldn't stay with Blaine the whole way.
Keep up the good work Royals.
alex longren from rogers got the teams only goal
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 11:45 pm
by BIGSEXY
TomTheBomb wrote:You're wanting to count the empty netter as a goal, aren't you? My statement was supposed to be referring to on Kupka, but whatever. I didn't clarify the fine print. You win and are way smarter than me.
It was a dirty victory but I'll take it
. Blaine easily could have had 5 or 6 but Kupka played awesome. However, for you to say that there was no way Blaine was going to score more than 3 on Rogers was a little out there.
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 11:50 pm
by TomTheBomb
BIGSEXY wrote:However, for you to say that there was no way Blaine was going to score more than 3 on Rogers was a little out there.
No, it was right on. Without the EN goal, they did only score 3.
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 11:57 pm
by BIGSEXY
TomTheBomb wrote:BIGSEXY wrote:However, for you to say that there was no way Blaine was going to score more than 3 on Rogers was a little out there.
No, it was right on. Without the EN goal, they did only score 3.
We may be arguing a dead point but oh well. When you say there is NO WAY that Blaine would score more than 3 means that if they played 10 times Blaine wouldn't have one game where they scored more than 3. They scored 3 on Kupka today and they hit a post, Beaudette somehow missed his breakaway and they somehow missed on the 3 on 1. Just about every other day they would convert on those chances. Rogers played a GREAT game for them and were able to hold the Bengals to 3 goals today and only today.
Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2007 12:10 am
by TomTheBomb
All those things happened because of Kupka. That was the point I was trying to make in the first place. Kupka would be a difference maker.
Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2007 12:13 am
by BIGSEXY
Either way Blaine 4-1, I'm a happy guy
Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2007 12:52 am
by EREmpireStrikesBack
BIGSEXY wrote:TomTheBomb wrote:BIGSEXY wrote:However, for you to say that there was no way Blaine was going to score more than 3 on Rogers was a little out there.
No, it was right on. Without the EN goal, they did only score 3.
We may be arguing a dead point but oh well. When you say there is NO WAY that Blaine would score more than 3 means that if they played 10 times Blaine wouldn't have one game where they scored more than 3. They scored 3 on Kupka today and they hit a post, Beaudette somehow missed his breakaway and they somehow missed on the 3 on 1. Just about every other day they would convert on those chances. Rogers played a GREAT game for them and were able to hold the Bengals to 3 goals today and only today.
And Rogers could have had another 2 on Blaine if they had trickled in... shoulda, woulda, coulda.
And thanks northstar (Alex Longren).
Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2007 1:23 am
by Can't Never Tried
Congrats to the Bengals for living up to their #1 seed they really did give Rogers all they could handle and proved they were the better team today.
I hope people saw that Rogers was all that was said about them by holding the game to a 1-1 game until midway in the 3rd period.
Were they a # 9 seed? i'll let the Blaine folks answer that, I think Rogers made their point, as it took the #1 seed all three periods to knock off the Royals.
I'm very proud of the way the Royals season went and I think they made the showing that they are not just this average A team that a lot of people said about them.
Great job Royals and good game Bengals good luck on your way thru.
EREmpire sorry I didn't see your post of where I would be sitting, but if you were there in the blue jacket I was right behind you..... if not oh well he was a nice guy as well.