I found fault with nearly everything that article said. Sure, their job is easier without the Wings and the 'Lanche, but the task doesn't end in the Eastern Conference finals. Is that really what they meant to say? Mediocrity does not reign. I have a feeling Ottawa, New Jersey, Vancouver, Dallas and well, every other team would have something to say about that. And I bet no Flyer would agree either. And for pete's sake... 'No genuine superstars'!?! That is straight crack-talk. I'm dumber for having read that.
- By the way, that last comment should in no way reflect poorly on the post, andrewaff. I just think what they said was really, really, really stupid.
"...One of the greatest snipers of all time in Claude Lemieux." A gritty, hard-checking, pesky goal-scorer, yes. But a great sniper? I agree 86, my hockey-sense is tingling. The Flyers probably do need more star power. How 'bout one of the greatest snipers of all time?
So first they say: Detroit is gone. Colorado is gone. St. Louis is gone. Mediocrity reigns. I guess that means that the Flyers are a mediocre team. They point to St. Louis as one of the "non-mediocre" teams ousted. I'm sorry, I missed the part where Vancouver is a worse team than St. Louis, because last I checked they were higher seeded and they had, arguably, more of this magical star power with Bertuzzi and Naslund. They point to Colorado and Detroit as teams loaded with stars -- yet these are exactly the teams that are now busy with golf season. Doesn't that prove that Philly has a chance, no matter how "mediocre" they are? My head is spinning from all the contradictions in that article. At first I thought it was a joke, but it said April 27th is not April Fools Day.
Philadelphia and crack? Impossible.
