robbie schremp
- Thread starter Pensfan86
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
- Status
In general, I don't put a lot of weight into what local sports beat
writers have to say, about anyone.
I'd like to note that I didn't mean to imply that I didn't like
Schremp. Quite the contrary. I think he has incredible
offensive talent and he's thrilling to watch. And he seems like
a nice, likable kid. Kid being the emphatic word. He's defintely
a bit immature, but he'll grow out of that.
I was just trying to put some context around the Schremp/USA Hockey
relationship. It's clearly improving and even though you may not
think much of Cressman's writing, it's clear from Rob's quotes that
he's learned how to deal with the press, answer questions appropriately,
but still maintain that confident edge which he needs to stay sharp.
It's also important to note that with all the negative stories and baggage
associated with Rob, his former and current teammates typically have
only good things to say about him. Now, some of that is certainly just
politeness on their parts, but from what I've heard, this kid is a great
teammate, loves to be around the guys and if possible would spend all
of his free time at the rink.
Dogman
writers have to say, about anyone.
I'd like to note that I didn't mean to imply that I didn't like
Schremp. Quite the contrary. I think he has incredible
offensive talent and he's thrilling to watch. And he seems like
a nice, likable kid. Kid being the emphatic word. He's defintely
a bit immature, but he'll grow out of that.
I was just trying to put some context around the Schremp/USA Hockey
relationship. It's clearly improving and even though you may not
think much of Cressman's writing, it's clear from Rob's quotes that
he's learned how to deal with the press, answer questions appropriately,
but still maintain that confident edge which he needs to stay sharp.
It's also important to note that with all the negative stories and baggage
associated with Rob, his former and current teammates typically have
only good things to say about him. Now, some of that is certainly just
politeness on their parts, but from what I've heard, this kid is a great
teammate, loves to be around the guys and if possible would spend all
of his free time at the rink.
Dogman
windowlicker said:
All as I was saying is, if you are going to post an article, don't post one written by that hack. Schremp's and O'Sullivan's stories are nothing new, and the context of this article has been written about over and over again. Everything that bum writes is to keep himself in Dale Hunter's good books.
The bigger story with Schremp isn't what he has done for half a year, but why there is this negative aoura around him. dogman15 post paints a clearer, and much more understandable picture of what Schremp's history is, and why he is where he is.
Basically, I would rather read an Al Strachen article, then this jagoff's crap.
Seachd
Registered User
- Mar 16, 2002
- 25,262
- 9,907
Dion Mustard said:
Actually, since you can't seem to give any valid reasons why we ignore everything we read in the article, you just come off as having a serious issue with the writer. You obviously don't like him, and you're not giving us much reason to believe you.
Seachd said:
The cover up of the drunk driving charge, the fictional reason for Perry being cut last year, basically calling Sutter an idiot for cutting Bolland, etc. Questioning why Dylan Hunter not only didn't make the team, but why he wasn't invited. Spouting on and on that Perry is the main reason the #1 line has tallied so many points. Even though the Sudbury Wolves were missing 5 players including ther captain and coach, saying the sole reason the Knight's streak came to an end was because of the WJC. Need any more reasons?
This guy is a hack, and I thought I made that clear to begin with.
rt
Clean Hits on Substack
Lowetide
Registered User
- Feb 27, 2002
- 13,281
- 12
dogman15 said:
I didn't quote the entire post but it was terrific, thank you. I would just add that no matter how angry they are at Schremp they're not going to cut off their nose to spite their face.
If he deserves the ice time, he'll get it in the games that count. If he doesn't, a player the coaching staff feels is better able to handle the assignment will get the pt.
The US team has an excellent chance to win the entire thing, but they're not so much better than the competition that they can afford to ice anything less than their best players in the role mos suitable to their abilities.
Right?
rt said:
I did a quick look back through,
http://www.canoe.ca/Slam040216/chl_lon2-sun.html
Here is the article written about the drunk driving incedent that was publish almost a week after it happened. Cressman was made aware of the situation the morning after the accident, but chose not to inform the public and went along with the "injury" story until the lid was about to be blown off (when the OHL found out about it through the London Police Service). He also never talked about the subject again, and when Hunter went to court the story was left out of the sports pages, and hidden within the city section. The plea bargin that was agreed to was never once questioned by any of the journalists (dropping the drunk driving charge and only leveling out a $750 fine for careless driving). There was also no mention whatsoever of the third charge (leaving the scene). You would think a real journalist with integrity wouldn't sit on a story like this, and would want all the questions answered
http://www.canoe.ca/Slam031220/chl_lon1-sun.html
Here is Cressman's reason for Perry being cut at last year's camp. If you notice, Cressman can't tell us what happened, or when it happened (time or date). On top of that, the head scout denies it, along with Fluery and Paille. And notice he can't tell us who the scout is? Why is it if I said a reliable source told me, no one would believe me, but this guy say's it and it's true?
Of course, a year later, Perry barely made the team, so maybe he's just not as good as Cressman thinks. Or maybe his lack of skating ability would have been an issue on the bigger ice, or maybe he just didn't play well at the camp, much like Eric Fehr went through this year.
http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/LondonFreePress/Sports/2004/12/28/799216-sun.html
Here is Cressman raving about "Corey Perry's line". At no point of this tourney has Cressman even mentioned that Perry has been left off that line on occasion for other players.
http://www.canoe.ca/Slam031203/chl_jun1-sun.html
It was talked about earlier, but here's Cressman's reason for Schremp being cut. Funny, there is no mention of any of the things dogman15 brought up.
OHLArenaGuide
it's dot com
Dion Mustard said:
I would prefer not to get into this debate, but anyone truly connected with hockey circles knows that the Perry/Fleury story was true. The rumour was all over the NOOF for a week (posted by a guy who's related to a player on the OUA all-stars) before Cressman wrote it up, he most certainly didn't "come up with it".
I like Cressman, he's definitely not the greatest sportswriter in the world, but you don't get to be on Junior Hockey Radio and in The Hockey News without having some skill. There isn't another OHL writer out there who can boast more credentials.
sec17 said:
Paille denied it happened. Dallas scout, someone you should know, Paul MacIntosh said the story was absurd. No other reporter wrote about it, or even heard about it (and this is a country full of reporters who love placing blame on failures on anyone and every one they can). And even after Fluery's gaff in the final game, nobody said anything about it. But, people on the internet said it was true, so it must be!?!?! And to seal it, a guy who CLAIMS to be related to a player on the OUA all-stars, is your defining piece of evidence. It's as bad as Cressman's un-named scout. That is weak, and you should admit it.
Furthermore, this is Canadian Hockey, the Program of Excellence. No one player is ahead of the team. Seeing how this program handles itself, if anyone made such a claim as Fluery is being accused of, they would get turfed before you sound out the words in this sentence. Corey Locke (the OHL's leading scorer at the time) was cut from that team as a 19 year. Eric Fehr (the WHL's leading scorer this year) was cut this year. Perry barely made the team this year, and if Nathan Horton was returned, Perry would have been cut. And if an injury hadn't helped him move up, Perry would be a 13th forward throughout the tourney. Why isn't it possible for some to realize Corey Perry isn't Mario Lemeuix?
Al Strachen has pretty impressive list of credentials too, but there isn't a single person in the hockey world who takes anything he's say's of value. Mike Brophey was/is the editor of the hockey news, and I'd really love to know what he did to earn that job, beyond get a Journalism degree and work in the copy room as a teenager.
But I like how you bypassed the other puff piece articles Cressman has tried to pass off as journalism.
Just to add a little more;
You know, there are people on websites who swear they’ve been abducted by aliens. Does that make it true? There are people on websites who swear the object that crashed into the Pentagon on Sept. 11th was a missile, and not a high jacked airplane. Are they right? And there are people who claim George W. Bush stole the election in 2000 and again in 2004. Are they right?
See you can claim a lot of things, but you need to prove it for it to be true. And much like the things mentioned above, there is no proof to back up Cressman’s claims.
Cressman tells us there was a tiff between MA Fluery and Corey Perry. He just doesn’t tell us when it happened, or where it happened, or what it was about. Wouldn’t you say those are kind of important things?
Players get tiffed at one another all the time. It’s said Dion Phanuef fought one of his own Red Deer Rebel teammates during the summer evaluation camp (I can’t remember who it was at the moment), but yet neither has demanded the other be traded. Phanuef and Shea Webber have battled hard throughout their Junior careers, yet not only are the two showing great chemistry for Team Canada, they have been roommates since camp started.
Hockey players are known for sitting around and having a beer with a guy who 20 minutes after they were in a fist fight with on the ice.
Sure, there are guys no really don’t like each other on and off the ice. But those examples are rare, and everybody knows why there is a dislike.
Haven’t you been apart of trying out for a competitive team? Wasn’t there a player you really didn’t like, until he was your teammate? Remember back to Bell’s Making the Cut. How many guys were ready to kill each other on the ice, but were fine with the guy off the ice, or when he got switched teams?
In the Fluery/Perry case, nobody has answers. And to add to that, MA Fluery isn’t thought of as an ego problem. Beyond Cressman’s drivel, I haven’t heard a single person say a bad thing about Fluery. Even after the US game, if there was a speck of truth to this claim, why did it not come out then?
Answers, that’s all we want.
My biggest problem with this is not the lack of evidence you or Cressman’s have provided, but rather Cressman’s reasoning this is what caused Perry to be cut.
If he had said “Corey Perry was cut from the WJC team, and during the try out, it is rumored that he and starting goalie Marc-Andre Fluery had an incident togetherâ€, I would be fine with it. But he uses this has his reasoning for Perry not making it.
Perry barely made this year’s team. Why is it hard to believe he didn’t make last year’s team because of his play? Blair MacAsey said earlier this year Perry would have to show top 6 potential to be considered. See, other point producers like Clarke Macarthur and Colin Fraser can be used in other roles beyond putting points up. Do you think Perry could be used as an “energy†guy, or a grinder, or a penalty killer? Of course not. Plus with Perry’s foot speed, or lack there of, it could have poised a problem on the bigger ice surface. Plus, Perry was an 18 year old. He still had another shot at making it. As been the case for years, if two players are equal at the end of camp, the 19 year old always gets the nod over the guy with another year of eligibility left. But in reality, Perry was cut last year because of his play. Simply, in the two exhibition games that were televised, Perry did not play well. And when you are 18, and you don’t play well, and there is only one role you can play, it usually means you get cut.
Again, where are the answers to my questions, and why was Jim Cressman the only one to write about this?
Last edited by a moderator:
OHLArenaGuide
it's dot com
I'm not going to name names, but my cousin knows a player who made both last year's and this year's team, and that player said the story was true. This player isn't connected with the Knights or with Fleury and has no reason to lie.
Rick Middleton
Registered User
That's true, but the point to is to have your BEST players at this tournament, and whether or not you or any other Schremp haters want to say it the facts are the facts. USA hockey would prefer to showcase its college players before those who decided to go ply their trade elsewhere. Why else would Schremp have been almost left off the list? Aswell as Gerald Coleman in net? If there are two players who are up for one spot on this American team, and one plays for a US college team and the other is playing in the WHL or wherever, the college player get taken first. So don't talk to me about picking the best players at every position.Reilly311 said:
Why should how well they are playing on their current teams make no difference? Corey Schneider was playing fantastic on his team, is that why they chose him? Well we all know how that played out, YIKES! Perhaps USA hockey would be wise to hold an evaluation camp rather than just choosing its team. That way they have to perform to be on the team, as opposed to being given a spot without having to compete. In Team Canada's evaluation camp, you had Jeff Carter putting a hit on Brent Seabrook that nearly cost Seabrook a chance to be at the tourney, because of the injury. Let me say that both were in no real danger of not getting a spot, it just strengthens the argument to have to make sure that every time you put on your nations jersey you have to compete to the best of your ability. Ironically, I haven't seen the US team compete very much up to the Sweden game, and lets face it, the US must have been thrilled at having to play Sweden as opposed to one of the other possibilities at keeping their hopes alive. That being said, they did show up, or atleast enough of them that they were able to get it done.
Now don't get me wrong, I am not suggesting that strange things can't happen. That Belarus win was strange, but the way they won was because they simply wanted it more than the US did, and they played better. The US has looked less than mediocre at times in every game they have played. They did get some respect back yesterday, but will it be enough to take them back to the medal podium?
Last edited:
Could'nt help but love that sweet little move he pulled in the third last night....he's got skills for sure.
Puckhead said:
Thats why Fritsche and O'Sullivan are looked at heavily to score for their team right? Or mayber because 19 year olds playing in College are more mature playing other 19 year olds than playing 15 and 16 year olds in the CHL? They won gold using those college players last year.
Puckhead said:
Maybe it's perhaps he's not that good?
I know that may come as a shock to you. While he's been good when he scores his goals, he has been less then steller on defense.Puckhead said:
Then why wasn't Perry the first player named to team canada? Afterall, he had the most points out of anyone in the CHL. Why were there so many WHL players chosen over OHL and Q players who had better seasons?
Puckhead said:
No, they probably chose him because he's a good goalie. I know that USA Hockey has watched him more than you have.
Puckhead said:
gibberish.
sec17 said:
On top of not naming names, you aren't going to say what, or when it happened. And again, why was it Jimbo Cressman, an individual who can only write puff pieces to make him look good within the London organization, the only one to publically talk about it?
This "player" you claim to know, may not have a reason to lie, but you do.
At the end of the day, it doesn't even matter if there was or wasn't true. The fact is, Perry did not play well enough, and did not bring enough to the table to make the team last year. Making excuses for him is pathetic.
Last edited by a moderator:
nomorekids
The original, baby
Puckhead said:
I'm sorry, man..but that's kind of ridiculous. Chris Holt was a more notable omission in goal than Gerald Coleman, and Schneider was the best pick, despite having a bad game. He's there for experience, and will replace Montoya when the time comes.
Understood, but why should Holt and Coleman be tossed aside. What if Schneider has a pathetic season leading up to the 2006 WJC, is he still a shoe in? YES!, because USA hockey chose to bring him along this year because they looked into their crystal balls and saw that he was the best goalie in the next calendar year. I have said this before, this is a short tourney and you have to go with guys who have proven they belong there, not simply being chosen because they were on the team the year before. That is ridiculous!nomorekids said:
First of all Crosby had the most points in the CHL, I figure if you want to quote me, then you should have the correct info to do so.Reilly311 said:Thats why Fritsche and O'Sullivan are looked at heavily to score for their team right? Or mayber because 19 year olds playing in College are more mature playing other 19 year olds than playing 15 and 16 year olds in the CHL? They won gold using those college players last year.
Maybe it's perhaps he's not that good?
Then why wasn't Perry the first player named to team canada? Afterall, he had the most points out of anyone in the CHL. Why were there so many WHL players chosen over OHL and Q players who had better seasons?
No, they probably chose him because he's a good goalie. I know that USA Hockey has watched him more than you have.
gibberish.
As far as Fritsche and O'Sullivan are concerned, they are great players, who happen to play in the OHL. Where in my rant did I say that the US wouldn't choose any one other than college players? Clearly the team is not as strong without its best players, and Fritsche, O'Sullivan and Schremp are among their best. End of discussion.
Regarding Schremp, you obviously haven't been watching the same games I have. His offence in a limited role speaks for itself. Please explain how he has hurt his team with his so-called "less than stellar defense", are you saying that because you read somewhere that he his so inept on defense?, because he definitely hasn't shown it on the ice?
And telling me you are pretty sure that the people at USA hockey have watched him closer than I have is just such a revelation! I never made myself out to be a Corey Schneider know it all, and frankly I never said he was a bad goalie, I just simply made mention that I have questions about USA hockeys selection process. I guess its not just the Canadian fans who get a little touchy about their beloved hockey programs.
The truth is, I am not here to bash the US or their program, they have done a nice enough job of that with their on ice performances thus far in the tourney. The US wins gold, and now they are a hockey power?
Lets look at the whole picture before we reply with...GIBBERISH!
Last edited:
- Status
