Jump to content

Messier/Iron Mike??


TheBearded1

Recommended Posts

Too young and uninterested at that time of my life but many here see it as a dark time.

 

WHY?

 

Wasn't it a good idea to bring in winning pedigree?  Who wouldn't want one of hockey's greatest leaders in their room?  Who wouldn't want a cup winning coach behind their bench?   To me, it only spells success.

 

Why the negativity and why the early exits from both personalities?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As millennial, everything happens for reason. At the moment I don’t think they expected that back lash. 94’ still stung though. 
 

WCE era wouldn’t have happened.

Probably wouldn’t have drafted Sedins.
No Bertuzzi for Luongo. 
 

 

Dark times but kinda made up for it. Linden came home in the end. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In theory it was a good idea.  In practice Messier was a locker room cancer and was the laziest piece of trash to ever wear a Canucks jersey.  He then insisted on having Keenan hired who further destroyed the team by trading any player who actually cared.  Both were complete disgraces to the sport on and off the ice, both here and everywhere else they went.

  • Thanks 1
  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back in those days, most Canucks fans, including myself, were up in arms about Mark Messier joining our team even before he set foot on the ice. The wounds of Lindens broken ribs was still fresh, and to make matters worse, Messier was given the number 11 jersey, a number that had always been unofficially retired out of respect for Wayne Maki. It felt like a slap in the face to our beloved Canucks history and our Captain

 

The Messier Signing is one that, let's put it kindly, didn't turn out the way anyone hoped. In fact, it's widely regarded as one of the worst decisions in Canucks history. Messier's performance left much to be desired,He mailed it in.  Tt was clear that Messier and Iron Mike wasn't winning any popularity contests among fans, myself included. I was only 15 at the time, and while I couldn't catch every game due to limited broadcasts, I devoured every bit of Canucks news I could find in the Province and the Sun, and all the latenight sports highlights, especially the spicy stuff.

 

The media, much like the fans, weren't holding back either. Even nearly two decades after Messier's departure, they were still airing their grievances. I vividly remember how much the Messier era irked me and many others. https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/mark-messier-canucks-contract-1997

 

What's intriguing is that despite the mess Messier left behind, the Linden trade did lead to some unexpected silver linings. We acquired players like Todd Bertuzzi, Ruttu, And McCabe which led to drafting the Sedins, who would later become the backbone of our team's success for a solid decade. There was also the Petr Nedved trade, which brought Markus Naslund into the mix.

 

F Messier

Edited by Dankmemes187
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Hammertime said:

Google is your friend. Unles youre trolling in which case lame troll do better. 

 

In this case I think someone would get a more truthful explanation from a knowledgable fan vs the sanitized Hockey Night in Canada or ESPN version found on google.

 

Edited by Playoff Beered
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TheBearded1 said:

Too young and uninterested at that time of my life but many here see it as a dark time.

 

WHY?

 

Wasn't it a good idea to bring in winning pedigree?  Who wouldn't want one of hockey's greatest leaders in their room?  Who wouldn't want a cup winning coach behind their bench?   To me, it only spells success.

 

Why the negativity and why the early exits from both personalities?

 

 

 

The Vancouver media fabricated a lot of nonsense at that time.  

 

Both Linden and Messier have gone on record stating that their so-called "personal friction" between one another was blown way out of proportion.

 

The truth of the matter is that the 1994 Canucks core had grown stale and the locker room had become a country club atmosphere.  After getting dominated by Colorado in 6 games in 1996 round 1, the Canucks missed the playoffs in 1997. Linden was no longer the player that he once was after his knee surgery, while guys like Mogilny and Tikanen were unhappy.  Bure was still suffering the after effects of whiplash from the first game of the season and wasn't himself.

 

The bottom line?  The core needed to be gutted. Messier should not have been brought in as "the missing piece," but the owners saw things completely differently.  Not only that but the owners basically promised Messier the world (i.e. club seats to Grizzlies games + input at the managerial level).  They enticed the hell out of Messier in order for him to come here.  

 

When Messier got here, he didn't know about Wayne Maki's history and so he was given #11 by ownership.

 

When Messier got here, the media and fans were "mess" merized and basically anointed Messier the captain themselves and so Linden himself gave Messier the captaincy in order to avoid it becoming a distraction.  

 

So long story short - the whole Messier thing was doomed to be a failure from the start.  A lot of the core players weren't the biggest fans of Messier from the get-go because they had competed against each other for the cup just a few years earlier.  When the Canucks stumbled out of the gate that season, Messier told ownership about the 'country club atmosphere' in the locker room (which is basically what media members like Neil McRae were saying at the time) and changes started to happen.  

 

Was Messier an innocent victim in all of this?  Absolutely not.  Years later, Messier even admitted that he shouldn't have accepted Linden's request for the captaincy.  However, Messier should not have been brought in in the first place and that was on ownership.  

  • Upvote 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Jeremy Hronek said:

 

The Vancouver media fabricated a lot of nonsense at that time.  

 

Both Linden and Messier have gone on record stating that their so-called "personal friction" between one another was blown way out of proportion.

 

The truth of the matter is that the 1994 Canucks core had grown stale and the locker room had become a country club atmosphere.  After getting dominated by Colorado in 6 games in 1996 round 1, the Canucks missed the playoffs in 1997. Linden was no longer the player that he once was after his knee surgery, while guys like Mogilny and Tikanen were unhappy.  Bure was still suffering the after effects of whiplash from the first game of the season and wasn't himself.

 

The bottom line?  The core needed to be gutted. Messier should not have been brought in as "the missing piece," but the owners saw things completely differently.  Not only that but the owners basically promised Messier the world (i.e. club seats to Grizzlies games + input at the managerial level).  They enticed the hell out of Messier in order for him to come here.  

 

When Messier got here, he didn't know about Wayne Maki's history and so he was given #11 by ownership.

 

When Messier got here, the media and fans were "mess" merized and basically anointed Messier the captain themselves and so Linden himself gave Messier the captaincy in order to avoid it becoming a distraction.  

 

So long story short - the whole Messier thing was doomed to be a failure from the start.  A lot of the core players weren't the biggest fans of Messier from the get-go because they had competed against each other for the cup just a few years earlier.  When the Canucks stumbled out of the gate that season, Messier told ownership about the 'country club atmosphere' in the locker room (which is basically what media members like Neil McRae were saying at the time) and changes started to happen.  

 

Was Messier an innocent victim in all of this?  Absolutely not.  Years later, Messier even admitted that he shouldn't have accepted Linden's request for the captaincy.  However, Messier should not have been brought in in the first place and that was on ownership.  

 

Hmmmm........thinks about it for a millisecond or so!

 

Nope......F messier!

 

 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, puckstopper said:

 

Hmmmm........thinks about it for a millisecond or so!

 

Nope......F messier!

 

 

 

Fair enough but just so you know, Naslund gives Messier a LOT of credit for helping him become a superstar.  

 

Naslund was floundering during his first few years as a hockey player but started to take leaps and bounds during the dark period.  When Messier got bought out in 2000, we had a young superstar on our hands that was ready to lead this team.  

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Messier and Keenans tenures were documented disasters and some other posters have laid out the main points really well.

 

But I think you're wondering why fans were upset about the decision to bring them in, before all the bad stuff happened?

 

It would be similar to the 2015 Canucks signing Milan Lucic and Claude Julien, then letting Lucic take the captaincy from Henrik. It felt bad, like you sold out the identity of the team. 

Even if it would have been a good hockey move, it felt wrong. It's almost like karmic justice just how poorly that experiment went.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jeremy Hronek said:

 

Fair enough but just so you know, Naslund gives Messier a LOT of credit for helping him become a superstar.  

 

Naslund was floundering during his first few years as a hockey player but started to take leaps and bounds during the dark period.  When Messier got bought out in 2000, we had a young superstar on our hands that was ready to lead this team.  

 

Well said and i remember when he said it. It's just that I'm stubborn and loved that 94 team so much.

we wouldn't be here if we weren't so passionate about our canucks!  

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Jeremy Hronek said:

 

Fair enough but just so you know, Naslund gives Messier a LOT of credit for helping him become a superstar.  

 

Naslund was floundering during his first few years as a hockey player but started to take leaps and bounds during the dark period.  When Messier got bought out in 2000, we had a young superstar on our hands that was ready to lead this team.  

Messier gave him a clear example of what not to do both as a player and as a person.  Naslund simply has far more class than that worthless piece of trash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Messier gave him a clear example of what not to do both as a player and as a person.  Naslund simply has far more class than that worthless piece of trash.

 

So the Vancouver media and Vancouver fans are completely correct about Messier while every single other NHL pundit is wrong about Messier.

 

Got it.  

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Jeremy Hronek said:

 

So the Vancouver media and Vancouver fans are completely correct about Messier while every single other NHL pundit is wrong about Messier.

 

Got it.  

Do you think his conduct here was acceptable?  Yes or no?  There is literally no reason for anyone to respect that scumbag as a player or as a man.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...