MickeyT

one game was a nationally broadcast pageant show. the other was a regular ol’ Monday night clunker.

I'm actually amazed Roenick didn't have it removed from the interview.

 

it was really good to hear that Chiclets gives full editing rights to their guests. and yeah given the climate of NBC you’d think that JR or anyone would think twice and play it safe. but it also shows just how comfortable JR and Tappen must be with each other for him to share and leave it in.

 

I don’t think NBC had much of a choice, given Weinstein and Lauer.

 

but I also don’t think Tappen had much of a choice to come out and say (through NBC PR) that she was uncomfortable even if she wasn’t really—OR if she didn’t want to speak up at all. she literally had to represent all women and damn that sucks.

 

not sure anyone remembers but a few years ago a weather lady for KTLA in Los Angeles was handed a sweater (by a male co-worker) to cover up on live air, presumably because she was wearing a little black dress. the story went national and all the knives were out. a few days later she came out and said it was a joke, no big deal, and that she loves her co-workers and shares their humor. that was just before the MeToo movement. I’m not so sure she could defend her friends the same way today. when a woman gets put in the spotlight now they get stuck with the MeToo megaphone. I wonder if Tappen would’ve been free to actually laugh with her bff if it was 2016.

 

best guess is his work ethic. word is he’s putting in what DQ wants to see with regards to mindset & effort (first in/last off the ice at practice, etc). also could be relationship driven.. who’s in his ear, mentoring right now.

 

but on its face, yeah he needs some quality Hartford love.

Erin Andrews profile went thru the roof from something way, way worse. Tappen is already seeing a social media bump. shitty situation but hey good for her. honestly she should go on Chiclets imo but hard to imagine NBC being ok with it anytime soon.

Winnipeg would travel and it’d be lit.

 

but prolly going to be St. Louis.

holy shit Zegras

 

word is 3-4wks..

 

 

bonehead move by a captain. probably had something to do with Russia putting up a touchdown on em.

It is believed Andersson spent the holiday with his family in the New York area. It is unclear whether the Rangers would welcome the Swede back if he has a change of heart, though the organization probably might have a collective-bargaining agreement issue in holding to an indefinite suspension.

 

https://nypost.com/2019/12/28/interest-in-suspended-ranger-lias-andersson-about-what-youd-expect/

 

Larry is being vague on this. what?s the CBA position here? can?t imagine we have to pay this kid another nickel but what happens if it drags out?

6pts

 

our anthem is better than theirs

play Lemieux with one hand

Janu-haley

can we get a point for 40min of competitive hockey??

Can't share illegal streams here. PM it to him.

 

yikes ok

hot damn it?s a Michigan

whoops deleted

not sure I’m ready for #ArtyParty to be a thing.

Am I just missing Miller or is he not dressed?

he’s in there

Tappen through NBC PR.

 

anything ?through NBC PR? probably means it went through NBC PR?which is lol some network ass covering all bases shit

Because Tappen already said it was unacceptable.

 

yeah that’s different but I haven’t heard that anywhere. that said, apart from Tappen or his wife speaking out I find any offense to the situation to be bs.

how do we know his wife and Tappen are not ok with it? if either have suggested otherwise, that’s different. but from what we know right now they could totally be into it. and what’s wrong with that?

happy whatever you’re drinking to :clap:

Must not matter to them but if it was the female members of their family, or for that matter, friends as well, probably be taking a far different tack.

 

but it had nothing to do with them. let?s try to be ever-so-remotely objective about this.

 

A, B, & C are close friends who love/respect one another.

 

A makes an attempt at humor involving B & C. neither are offended.

 

however A is reprimanded because D, E, & F would presumably be offended if that same attempt at humor was about them or anyone who thinks like them. which it clearly wasn?t.

 

but A was reprimanded to show D, E, & F that they or anyone who thinks like them would be justified in being offended if it was indeed about them. which again, it clearly wasn?t.

 

ok here?s the fun part: D, E, & F likely never would?ve heard of A?s attempt at humor if there wasn?t a reprimand. nevertheless, high fives are exchanged. D, E, & F have presumably succeeded in being justified even though they had nothing to do with nothing. good times.

 

this is madness.

Maybe it works for him in practice against Hank

damn, it?s come to this now?