The NHL finally released the names of the new divisions yesterday and, of course, managed to screw that up. The Western divisions, named the Pacific and Central divisions, are fine; we could nitpick a few teams and locations but ultimately they make sense. As for the East, well, that's a whole different story. The NHL decided to keep the Atlantic Division. That makes a lot of sense considering the Atlantic Division as it has has existed for over a decade is still intact. However, they decided to make the "Atlantic Division" hold the Bruins, Habs, Leafs, et al and name what was once the Atlantic Division (plus Columbus, Carolina, and Washington) the Metropolitan Division.
Here is the definition of "metropolitan" according to Webster:
"of, relating to, or characteristic of a metropolis (large city) and sometimes including its suburbs."
Essentially, the New York Rangers are now in the "Large city and surrounding areas" division. Which is ridiculously vague and indicative of absolutely nothing. Literally every single NHL team (and most AHL teams) is located in a metropolitan area; either inside a big city or its surrounding suburbs. Meanwhile, the Detroit Red Wings, who are closer to the Mississippi River than the Atlantic Ocean, is part of the "Atlantic Division." If the NHL wanted to go with a vague and stupid name like "Metropolitan" then why couldn't the teams actually near the Atlantic keep their division name and let Montreal and Toronto and the others be the "Metropolitan Division"? Then again, the people in charge of these decisions are the same ones in charge of contributing to three lockouts in under 20 years so why should anyone be surprised?
Anyway, I'm going to milk the moment and take advantage of the openness of this. Keep reading for some stupid things I extemporaneously decide to throw together.
I watched MasterChef a couple of days ago and it led me to question when the last time Gordon Ramsay has messed up a dish. I don't mean something like, "these fish tacos were good but could have used a bit more cheese." I mean really screwing up. Like burning the chicken or making his curry way too spicy or something like that. Even Henrik Lundqvist lets in a soft goal once in a while and Tom Seaver didn't go his entire career without some terrible outings; there's no way that Gordon Ramsay just NEVER screws up a beef wellington to the point that it's unenjoyable, right? How long ago, though? This month? The last three months? This year?
Twitter is great. I love being able to interract with people I otherwise never would have. That being said, there is so much cancer throughout. Part of the cancer is parody accounts. For every funny parody account there are 100 that are annoying. There are like five million Condescending Wonka and Will Ferrell accounts they all recycle the same five tweets that all the other millions of parody accounts have tweeted at least five times with hopes that nobody will notice. Then there are the parody accounts that aren't actually parody accounts.
Stop making exceptions for people who only make excuses.— Mila Kunis (@MilIa_Kunis) July 18, 2013
Is there anyone in the world who would read that and think, "oh my god that totally sounds like Mila Kunis"? It's literally just a generic tweet that you'd expect from any 14-year-old girl who is trying to be deep and emotional.
Then there are the people who see the success of a few of the truly great sports parody accounts, such as the Bryzgalov parody which is of a player who can be parodized, and decide to pollute the atmosphere with parody accounts of other players. No, people, "Stralman's Ego" is not something that has to exist and using the F-Word in every other sentence does not make you edgy or amusing. Don't make these stupid accounts every time the Rangers pick up some generally uninteresting player. Don't follow me or tweet at me with those accounts in hopes that I'm going to retweet you and make you into a Twitter superstar. It's not going to happen.
President Obama recently released a statement in regards to the acquittal of George Zimmerman, and I'm not going to get involved in politics or the case itself because it's just not necessary. But this brings up a trend I'm beginning to notice which is that we're slowly developing a culture, media-wise, where it's expected that the president release a statement on everything that happens ever. It's not as if FEMA was bribing the jury under the table. The trial went as all other trials do. The judicial system is set up with the understanding that, once in a while, a person who might be guilty might not be convicted. This isn't something that requires executive intervention. Was Franklin Delano Roosevelt holding press conferences to voice his opinion on the decisions of a Florida jury in a murder case? Why the hell is it suddenly necessary that the President "have a stance" on everything? By the 2016 election we're going to have Skip Bayless mediating a serious, nationally televised First Take Debate between Hillary Clinton and Marco Rubio as he insists that "voters want to know" what their stance is on Pete Rose and the Hall-Of-Fame. And I'm going to have a seizure when it happens.
Here's a fun fact: Michelle Branch has perfect pitch. Considering 99% of songs that hit the radio consist of autotuned samples of Will.I.Am or Nikki Minaj gargling with
washing machine noises computerized dubstep beats in the background it's refreshing to listen to someone who is genuinely talented.
Have a good weekend, everybody.
Follow Me On Twitter: @Herman_NYRBlog
If no one heard... Next superman movie will be Superman and Batman film (2015), Flash (2016), Justice League (2017).... pretty cool stuff
Yeah, I think these Divisions were discussed over a crack pipe. When things are overcomplicated it usually means human ego is involved and someone is out for attention. I have no problem with the name of our division even though it's stupid but couldn't they have just done the divisions according to geographical location and cut back, even if just slightly on the teams travel burdens?? Politics?? Really?
Personally want to thank @Herman_NYRBlog for the demise of the blog this morning.
So you forgot something. The east has 16 teams so it is technically harder for a team in the east to make the playoffs. There was no point to do realignment until expansion was done if this was they were not going to do 15 and 15. You might say its only two teams or its only for a couple years. But the fact is that it is more difficult for the Rangers to make the playoffs than the kings. That is bullshit, and the odds are already against us.
I have a question in relation to HOCKEY and my apologies for cutting into your political discussion. not really that sorry though haha. I am looking to get tickets to the rangers devils tilt Oct 19th at the Prudential. It part of a bachelor party so I'm trying to get like 15 tickets in the same section. What would be the best way to go about it? Box Office? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks. LGR
@BleedBlueNYR Considering the lineup they'll have this year, and not making the playoffs last year, if you and your friends bring sticks and skates you can probably sit on the NJ bench during the game.
@BleedBlueNYR I'd call the Devils. I'm assuming they have a group ticket sales rep. They might offer some goodies for the group as well.
Seriously, there are so many other things that the government should be involved with. They should really look to bring a civil rights case against Gary Bettman for his 3 lockouts and hideous renaming of the realigned conferences. Epic fail by Obama!
@Wallace1 Annnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnd here we go....
The court decided, people may not agree with it but that's the Judicial system... Can we move on now. The president just resparked it by talking about it, but what else do you expect a chump move by a chump.
@Wallace1 I don't want to speak for Adam but I think he's talking more about the government having to chime in on everything. Just look at the Congressional hearings on steroids. I mean, with everything else going on in the world, that's what they were having hearings about?
@Herman_NYRBlog @KevinDeLury @Wallace1 Reports of race riots occurring in the country have been greatly exaggerated and overblown by certain members of the media. It simply hasn't and probably won't happen.
I agree with you as well Adam. I've voted for Obama twice, but there's simply no reason for him to get involved.
End political discussion.
@KevinDeLury @Wallace1 Absolutely. And the media has begun to take this as the status quo and as a result whenever anything newsworthy happens, regardless of how much the president's opinion actually matters, it's like they're EXPECTING him to comment. This case was nothing different from the millions of criminal cases in our country's history. It doesn't require his comment. And the president's opinion on this matter (regardless of whether it's Obama or a different president in the past/future) is absolutely meaningless.