Toggle sidebar

Bobby Hull legacy thread (see admin warning post #1)

Status
Not open for further replies.
67 others said:
To be fair hes not wrong. A few years ago it was a well known story.
www.hockeyfeed.com

Hockey Night in Canada ratings take major hit since Don Cherry’s firing

Here is what fans think about that:
www.hockeyfeed.com www.hockeyfeed.com

torontosun.com

LILLEY: Dumping Don Cherry hurting HNIC ratings

If there was ever any doubt that firing Don Cherry from
torontosun.com torontosun.com

Folks at the time who disliked Cherry literally pointed to cord cutting, not love for Cherry, being a bigger factor lol
Click to expand...
Well, at least you took the time to find that. Which backed up another's claim.
And in any event, a lotta people in Germany at one time liked & admired Hitler. Not sure the number of fans you have necessarily correlates to anything good or decent.
 
Big Phil said:
Luckily I only give back a fraction of the things I get, huh? :thumbu: It's a message board, it isn't our livelihood. Try not to take it so seriously. Just some advice.
Click to expand...
Ok, but you realize your wasting people's time by pulling off these "pranks" right?

I mean, you had a whole discussion with with users regarding your age, involving a supposedly sick parent who was the original owner of the account for which you had to take over. You even had a private conversation about it with Bear that from the sounds of it, seemed pretty heartfelt.

And when I think of pranks, lighthearted comes to mind. Lying about an ill parent is not that. That's just unnecessarily toying with peoples emotions, some of which, was genuine concern and sympathy

The context matters too, we were talking about a pretty serious subject that was getting heated on both sides. I saw absolutely no indication you weren't serious, and only when you were called out on inconsistencies did you admit to the whole thing being a "prank".


Lastly, this message board for most is ultimately only a small part of our lives, but while we don't know each other, we are all pretty active and passionate on HOH. Particularly the select few members that have been around for a long time. I would bet some of you have known and spent more time with each other than people you know in real life (coworkers, acquaintances, etc). I really don't see it too differently than a hobby, if at all.

So imagine if you did something like this in real life with coworkers or people you only hang out with through certain activities. You don't see how that's a bit messed up?

Not sure what I mean to accomplish typing this long ass post, you probably don't care, much less from someone like myself whom you've never interacted with.

But as someone who has enjoyed your posts through the years, all this "prank" has accomplished (besides giving you enjoyment) is make people trust you less.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: mrhockey193195, slapKing, Beef Invictus and 6 others
Big Phil said:
I still can't get over your profile pick though. Neely and Bourque. Cherry would have married one of them if he could have.
Click to expand...
That's completely irrelevant and I couldn't care less. I'd be surprised if Bourque even likes him. Cherry isn't nearly as popular with Bruins fans as you probably think he is either.
 
In all seriousness, there were very few geniuses throughout history, who would be normal, sane, pleasant, and empathetic people. Benvenutto Cellini was a thief, Carravagio -- a murderer, Lermontov -- an insufferable prick (killed in a duel), Edgar Allen Poe -- a dopehead who married his 12 y.o. cousin. If we were to cancel art due to the controversies surrounding artists, we'd be left with very little.

Bobby Hull was a bad human being. But his records and his legacy should be venerated regardless of his personal flaws.

On a separate but related note. I wonder, which is worse to me: a Nazi-sympathizing wife-beater or a Putin promoter? I guess the former.
 
Big Phil said:
Wow, you really have a lot of time to dig hard. Actually, that's Big Phil Sr. When I started posting on here a long time ago I lurked a lot and sometimes used this profile. Then I just thought I'd make one myself. Well, the mods didn't like two profiles from the same IP address and they took the other one down. We explained the situation, but in the end I just used this one for quite some time. My dad doesn't post anymore, isn't well unfortunately. So most of the stuff over the last - 10-12 years has been me. Some was him still. Not now, not for, well, I would have said around 2016 or maybe earlier. But that is definitely him from 2016. I never saw Esposito's career. Obviously who else but your dad do you learn hockey from, so I know the game well, even things I wasn't there for (eg. 1972 Series)

Granted, I still go back a ways, just not that far.
Click to expand...

For those paying attention: this is nonsense. Phil claimed to be "under 50" and when clear examples of him claiming to be much older were presented, he had to make up the story you see above. Later last night, he came clean, privately recanting this entire thing, claiming he was just "punking" us and he's the same Big Phil he's always been since 2003. But I wasn't born yesterday - I knew there was more to this.

The truth is that he is not the wise, old fan who saw Esposito's whole career. He saw none of it, actually. Phil has been on these boards between the ages of 23 and 42, while pretending to be approximately 20-30 years older than that the entire time. When he took exception to me saying he was "in his 50s" two nights ago, and told me he was not actually that old, he was telling the truth, and broke character to do so. This whole thing about "playing a prank" is a lame attempt at saving face.

Why change your story back to save face? This is why: In 2009, Phil wrote a book. (seriously man, good for you). You may be wondering, why are you just hearing now that Phil wrote a book? If you were in this section in 2009 you may have seen a thread where Phil promoted this book, as though it was written by someone other than him. You must be wondering: If I wrote a book, I wouldn't be able to stop myself from promoting it in the HOH section and taking credit! Yeah, I think a lot of us would feel the same. But a lot of us aren't pretending to be someone else. Phil knew that if he took credit for writing the book, we would all find out he was just 29.

@Felidae explained quite eloquently why this is such a flagrant offense in this post. Seriously Phil, come clean. Admit you're 42, admit you wrote the book, admit you enjoyed playing the stodgy old boomer role all these years. You got us, man, that was the real prank, not all this flip flopping in the past 48 hours.

We don't need to think you're old to respect your hockey insights. Heck, by now you're probably almost as old as you were claiming to be back in 2003! So come clean.

(Note: edited years and age after I realized that the thread was from 2009, not 11-12)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: Nogatco Rd, mrhockey193195, the_speedster and 12 others
seventieslord said:
For those paying attention: this is nonsense. Phil claimed to be "under 50" and when clear examples of him claiming to be much older were presented, he had to make up the story you see above. Later last night, he came clean, privately recanting this entire thing, claiming he was just "punking" us and he's the same Big Phil he's always been since 2003. But I wasn't born yesterday - I knew there was more to this.

The truth is that he is not the wise, old fan who saw Esposito's whole career. He saw none of it, actually. Phil has been on these boards between the ages of 21 and 42, while pretending to be approximately 20-30 years older than that the entire time. When he took exception to me saying he was "in his 50s" two nights ago, and told me he was not actually that old, he was telling the truth, and broke character to do so. This whole thing about "playing a prank" is a lame attempt at saving face.

Why change your story back to save face? This is why: In 2009, Phil wrote a book. (seriously man, good for you). You may be wondering, why are you just hearing now that Phil wrote a book? If you were in this section around 2011-2012 you may have seen a thread where Phil promoted this book, as though it was written by someone other than him. You must be wondering: If I wrote a book, I wouldn't be able to stop myself from promoting it in the HOH section and taking credit! Yeah, I think a lot of us would feel the same. But a lot of us aren't pretending to be someone else. Phil knew that if he took credit for writing the book, we would all find out he was just 30-31.

@Felidae explained quite eloquently why this is such a flagrant offense in this post. Seriously Phil, come clean. Admit you're 42, admit you wrote the book, admit you enjoyed playing the stodgy old boomer role all these years. You got us, man, that was the real prank, not all this flip flopping in the past 48 hours.

We don't need to think you're old to respect your hockey insights. Heck, by now you're probably almost as old as you were claiming to be back in 2003! So come clean.
Click to expand...

Wow, I remember those threads over 10 years ago. I read Phil’s book and it’s a good read, not scholarly or anything but clearly written someone who knows and loves hockey history. It’s also in the same voice as Phil’s posts here on HOH. To me it was clearly the same person. But for some reason Big Phil didn’t want to take credit for the book.

Talk about a long fuse before this thing blew up. Internet drama, man.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: Nogatco Rd, mrhockey193195, Sentinel and 7 others
Well, no wonder he's always like "we all have to remember that..." and "we should think this way or that way". Apparently he has been referring to the situation in his own head rather than arrogantly trying to speak for all of us (!)

Usually I wouldn't kid about mental health issues, but hey, since this was just a prank!!!
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Xelebes, Sentinel, ResilientBeast and 3 others
I have absolutely no idea what's going on here.

Anyways - Ovechkin > Hull for all-time ranking of hockey players. I think Ovechkin's continued longevity has done enough to surpass Hull for me.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Beef Invictus
bobholly39 said:
I have absolutely no idea what's going on here.
Click to expand...

Someone who got caught telling the untruth in the past has decided to give it another try and was caught once more.

By mere coincidence, it happens to be the same person who keeps misrepresenting what his opponents say ("so you claim fans don't like fights") and do ("so you don't attend hockey games").
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: Sentinel and Beef Invictus
I guess my question would be..what on earth would drive someone to misrepresent their age, potentially by as much as three decades, on an internet forum for an entire twenty-year period??? Like…why?????

Is it a “respect” thing? We’d all hear what he has to say as some authoritative expert on many subjects..?

Someone help me understand. It’d be a good time for Big Phil to chime in.

Right now I think everyone just feels duped. Good prank I guess. Really got us!

BD87F590-C333-45CD-905C-F359A15B7DD6.png
 
Last edited:
Vladislav Tretiak (from the 1987 English edition of his autobiography):

"Winnipeg was the home of Bobby Hull, one of the greatest, and one of the kindest hockey individuals in Canada. Hull could be considered as a model of endurance and self-control. He was thirty-five years old, but his game hadn't lost that freshness and spark. He was able to do anything. . . . An interesting fact is that out of all of Hull's teammates, he was the only one who attended all the Team USSR practices and studied them very carefully." (p. 67)

"Bobby Hull gave me the most problems. Often when he took a shot, I did not even see the puck. He fired it like a bullet. But that was not the worst of it. Usually, when a hockey player takes a wrist shot or a slapshot, he has to wind up. . . . A good player has a wind-up that lasts only a split second, but the goalie has enough time to cover the spot where he is aiming. Hull did not have to wind up. His devastating shot was done strictly by the wrist." (p. 69)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sentinel, Voight, Frank Cannon PI and 1 other person
bobholly39 said:
I have absolutely no idea what's going on here.

Anyways - Ovechkin > Hull for all-time ranking of hockey players. I think Ovechkin's continued longevity has done enough to surpass Hull for me.
Click to expand...

Too many years of Hull being Hull vs. OV's years of being Bobby Hull and OV's years of being Brett. I think the flaws/limitations in OV's game were masked then unmasked before he hit the age of 26.

Hull's prime was simply longer and his playoff performances were generally better over his prime.

OV's goalscoring longevity reasonably moves him ahead of Jagr but not into the Top 10/ among the Beliveau, Crosby, Hull group. Richard v. OV is the more interesting debate (or potentially unending debate given their vastly different playoff legacies).
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Sentinel and jigglysquishy
Bobby Hull is still better than Ovechkin for me, more versatile player with a background on C. This season by Ovi does nothing for me, he's had two or so games where he's beaten up on WHA-level quality defenses (Chicago, Vancouver) with hat-tricks, plus a ridiculous stretch with 4 empty net goals in 3 games where his teammates put his team in the lead, plus scoring is up this year and numbers are inflated. Claiming Ovi carried WSH earlier in the season is beyond ridiculous, that's not what happened.

As for all the other nonsense in this thread, I'm not on this board to judge players characters, but violent spousal abuse is obviously bad, I guess that goes without saying (?).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MXD and seventieslord
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom