Thank you Kulpims!

In reply to this comment by kulpims:
*promote
http://www.videosift.com/video/Billy-Bob-Thornton-pulls-a-Joaquin-Phoenix-on-CBC-s-Q
http://www.videosift.com/video/Joaquin-Phoenix-On-Letterman-2-11-09

*promote
http://www.videosift.com/video/Billy-Bob-Thornton-pulls-a-Joaquin-Phoenix-on-CBC-s-Q
http://www.videosift.com/video/Joaquin-Phoenix-On-Letterman-2-11-09

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Billy Bob Thornton, crazy, Jian, Qtv, CBC, blowup' to 'Jian, Gomeshi, Qtv, CBC, radio, blowup, boxmasters, diva' - edited by SlipperyPete

That's Nabby, alright. There's a good reason why the Sharks currently have the best record in the league, the best home record in the league (most home wins, fewest losses in regulation, an astounding 31-3-4), are currently 2rd in Goals Allowed all season(188, Boston leads that stat with 180), and were the first team to clinch their division this season. They've set a team record for playoff points accumulated(111), and there's still 6 more games left to play. No other team has 50 wins, and only 4 other teams are capable of hitting that this late in the season. And on special teams, they've been juggernauts - ranked third in both Power Play goals, and Penalty Killing. They're also ranked 6th when it comes to Even Strength goals.

With arguably the most dominant line in Hockey today (Joe Thornton, Devon Setoguchi, and Captain Patty Marleau, 91 goals among them), the Sharks are going to be the team to beat come post-season. Nabby has 39 wins under his belt, and his backup, Brian Boucher, has put up some pretty great numbers in his 11 wins. Sharks have been making great moves all season - acquiring Rob Blake and Dan Boyle added Stanley Cup-experienced veterans on the Blue Line, and they've been solid.

This has been a storybook season for the Sharks. I'm hoping the story doesn't end before the Stanley Cup makes its way to San Jose for the very first time.

>> ^shuac:
DFT, you may be thinking of A Simple Plan (with Bill Paxton and Billy Bob Thornton), which this appears to be a parody of, not Blood Simple.

yeah, but it's the source clip's title.
maybe they couldn't come up with a good lampoon of the other title.

A Simple Recipe?... A Keebler Plan?...

good catch, thanks.

In reply to this comment by shuac:
DFT, you may be thinking of A Simple Plan (with Bill Paxton and Billy Bob Thornton), which this appears to be a parody of, not Blood Simple.

DFT, you may be thinking of A Simple Plan (with Bill Paxton and Billy Bob Thornton), which this appears to be a parody of, not Blood Simple.

^I agree, sifters tend to be a pretty rational and intelligent bunch. I think a little more true skepticism is called for. Remember the Maine, the Thornton Affair, the Reichstag fire, the USS Pueblo, the Gulf on Tonkin and on and on. Those events give me the right to be skeptical.

Did you know, Enzoblue, there's a term amongst fighters in MMA for somebody who is hoping to win by some quick lucky break rather than any superiority of technical or physical ability? It's called taking a puncher's chance.

And yes, that comes straight from boxing. In boxing, sometimes there are lucky hits, and sometimes no, you can't overcome them. Because every so often even a high level fighter will look the wrong way for a split second or bob when he should weave and just by chance, just from pure random chance, the can that he is supposed to be destroying takes a massive swing and gets the flash KO. And the champ will hit the mat, and he won't get up. Will and spirit and whatever else you want to say has no part in it, the man is unconscious.

So when you're talking about MMA, understand that fighters often consider standup striking to be a far riskier prospect, in that there is a higher chance that an inferior opponent will catch a lucky punch KO than a lucky sub.

As for this: "That's not fighting the way anyone wants, we want epic battles decided by brute force and technique and spirit." I have already addressed the fact that submission fighting is just as much a measure of technique, spirit, and athleticism as other aspects of the MMA game. And what exactly is "fighting the way anyone wants"? Do you think MMA fights are supposed to look the way people imagine they should, or more to the point, the way you imagine they should? They aren't, that's what Tony Jaa flicks are for. If you want to watch good fights the way they happen realistically between real experts, then go to an MMA match.

One of my coaches quoted after somebody commented about what he believed was a lucky win, "Luck is the intersection between opportunity and preparation." Sometimes inferior opponents catch lucky hits and lucky subs. That's the sport. The good guy doesn't always win. There is always the uncontrollable variable of luck, but the good fighters train so every other variable, be it strength, endurance, speed, power, whatever, is under their control.

In all honesty, I'm just repeating the things I said in my above post, but it's not clicking for you, I think because you don't have the experience or knowledge to dig what I'm saying. If one day you look deeper into MMA or even better take a crack at training it, you will be in a better position to judge. But until you do, and until you are, understand that I believe you are demeaning the sport by making ignorant assertions about what styles of fighting are "cheesy" or cheap, and what truly requires strength of heart.

P.S. As for groin strikes, if they were allowed, the sport would in all likelihood not be reduced to groin snipers. As Matt Thornton would say, adding a single strike does not affect the delivery systems that form the base for good fighters. Submissions, on the other hand, are not single attacks, they are a range of attacks, and thus are part of that base. It's the same as training for a self-defense type of situation: learn the gameplan, develop a base, then just add dirt.