http://hackingthemainframe.com/coppermine/albums/userpics/12788/normal_Cancucks%20Burning.jpg
Or will they Stay ALIVE!!! 
Their next 3 games, all against the Oilers will go a long way in answering that question. Personally, I hope the Oilers bury them.
'Nucks won tonight, which is goodâŚ
I donât think either team actually played particularly well except for the Canucks in the first 10 minutes.
Right now, I donât think the Canucks are too worried about being goodâŚjust good enough.
'82, '94, '06?? This year is very similar to the 1994 season. Canucks under acheived and went to the finals. It very well could happen again.
Have yer towels washed and ready!
That and the two against San Jose, and the two against Anahiem. Even the game against LA is going to be big. Bottom line is theyâve dug themselves a pretty deep hole and the only way out is to win, win, win.
On a side note, I thought a large chunk of the team played well tonight even after the first minutes. Sure Bert looked is normal horrible self and Nazzy coughed the puck up left and right, but the Sedins, Burrows, Kess, Linden, Green and all the D finally started playing with a little desperation and intensity.
I still want a Ruutu jersey 
Ruutu?? YESSSSSSS!!
Ruutu you want, well hereâs your Jersey.
http://hackingthemainframe.com/coppermine/albums/userpics/12788/smartass.jpg
haha that kinda works. Mine would have his name on their though.
That dope Witwicki wrote in the Daily News how he thought the Canucks would get to the finals this year because of the â12-year cycle.â
Whaa-a-t???
The Canucks have only been to the finals twice, so this supposed cycle has only occurred once and, therefore, is not a cycle!
Thatâs similar to those clowns that said every time the Habs trade a goalie to Colorado, the Avalanche win the Cup - it only happened once, so whatâs with the âevery time???â 
Weâll found out this Spring if there really is a cycle. The only problem with it is that if it is true then us long suffering Canuck fans will have to wait until 2018 until they get to the finals again. One step at a time thoughâŚ2006 first.
As long as the strike doesnât add a year to the cycleâŚ
That '82 run was incredible! No one gave them a chance in hell but they worked their bags off every game and earned every goal.
In '94 you thought they had a chance, but by the end of that last game Trevor Linden was the only Canuck who hadnât given upâŚ
[quote=âherbie_popneckerâ]
In '94 you thought they had a chance, but by the end of that last game Trevor Linden was the only Canuck who hadnât given upâŚ[/quote]
What about Kirk? I donât think that he looked like he had given up, he was still making saves in the closing minutes of game 7, trying to give the boys a chance to get back in it. You are right though, Trev was amazing in those playoffs.
On a side note, the âclangâ of LaFayette shot from the slot still haunts my sleep.
Youâre right, I was only thinking offense. They were behind and Linden was still making every effort til the horn went.
The ânewâ Canucks biggest psychological barrier is they like being the underdog. Theyâll dig themselves a hole and try to play their way out, over and over until they fail. Like with Minnesota and Calgary.
The Canucks really were underdogs until Pat QuinnâŚ
[quote=âpoolboyâ]That dope Witwicki wrote in the Daily News how he thought the Canucks would get to the finals this year because of the â12-year cycle.â
Whaa-a-t???
The Canucks have only been to the finals twice, so this supposed cycle has only occurred once and, therefore, is not a cycle!
Thatâs similar to those clowns that said every time the Habs trade a goalie to Colorado, the Avalanche win the Cup - it only happened once, so whatâs with the âevery time???â [/quote]
The Canucks entered the league in the fall of 1970, therefore they couldnât play in the playoffs that year since they didnât exist yet.
The first cycle was completed 12 years later (1982) when they made the finals against a New York team. The second cycle was completed another 12 years later (1994) when they made the finals against another New York team. This would then be the third cycle as it is another 12 years later (2006) if they make the finals and would be interesting if it is against Buffalo (also a New York team).
Stats are meant to be manipulated and abused for our enjoyment - just look at the polls for elections.
Hey⌠A word of advice. Donât get poolboy started on politics. Heâs a real pain in the arse. 
How about that Ryan Smyth goal in the shootout?
Like the Nash goal at the Olympics it should have been disallowed, even though the puck had to have been in the net.
The bottom line though, is that the ref on the ice called it no goal and there is no way that you can say that any of the video angles conclusively show the puck in the net (And by conclusive, I mean actually show the puck in the net).
If they want to conclude that even though they canât see the puck, it had to be in the net, then the Kesler goal in the 1st should have counted (Unless of course the ref felt that Kesler dislodged the net, which is crap since he wouldnât have gone in that hard had it not been for Pecaâs head-hunting hit).
All in all a good game though. In my mind, two weeks ago this team would have packed it in after that 2nd period. It was nice to see the boys dig in the heels and put up a fight in the situation.