First impressions are hard to erase

In the new era of social media, it is often forgotten that the way a person portrays him or herself is immediately up for discussion.

Neate Sager wrote an opinionated piece on the newest PR person for the OUA, which is what brought up this train of thought. In a time when it is difficult for current and recently graduated university students to find a quality job, a hiring of a young woman (or man, not discriminating here) for the position may immediately come under fire simply by questioning the experience that she can bring to the position.

However, when thoughts and comments are broadcasted through social media similar to those noted in the article, one has to think that perhaps the OUA made a poor choice in candidate.

Anyone working within the PR sector should know that comments are always up for interpretation and will almost certainly be spun into a context that will support any argument. The whole purpose of this job is to help give the OUA a more positive image within not only Canada but also the United States, especially due to the recent steroid scandal at Waterloo. Instead, the OUA office decided to hire someone who seems a bit unaware of the fact that her comments in social media are easily accessible and open to interpretation.

I will be the first to admit I have written some regrettable comments on my twitter account in an altered state of mind that perhaps were not the greatest sentiments to share with the internet, particularly with a then-open profile. They have been deleted since, and my awareness of what is posted is now much higher. It brought into sharp focus the fact that if my name is googled by a potential employer, Facebook and Twitter profiles would more than likely be the first things to pop up. Despite security settings, there are always personal connections which make gaining information about a person much easier than it previously has been. Judgement is quickly passed on people and generally it is difficult to change a person's opinion, especially if the behaviour is broadcast through social media.

For someone who is looking to create a positive image of not only herself but also that of the OUA, her comments made through social media should seriously be re-thought. One wonders how thorough her understanding of PR itself is if this is the image that is being broadcast.

To missed opportunities...

Leafs fans everywhere were elated at the end of the season with the realization that Tomas Kaberle's No Trade Clause was lifted for the summer. Many thought 'finally, this is when we can fully clean house on the JFJ era and start fresh'. Or at least I did.

However, 11:59pm on August 15, 2010 passed without any deal for the long-serving D man surfacing. This came as a huge disappointment, and will now be considered a mistake that Burke will always be remembered for.

Here's my take on Kaberle:

The guy has stuck around on the same team through the worst years the organization has seen in a long time. He's been happy that he is on a losing team. He has enjoyed being on a team that hasn't seen the postseason since before the lockout. He has never shown one ounce of truculence. Who's seen him throw a punch? Who's seen him show any form of grit or passion for playing? He just looks like a lost 12-year-old boy.

So why would you want to keep him? Why not clean house and start fresh with a group of young players who are hungry to prove themselves in the league?

And as for Kaberle. Why would you be happy to stick around with an organization that paraded you through the trade market begging for adequate compensation? Although it was somewhat of a compliment that Burke didn't think any offers were legitimate, you still gotta think that next opportunity you will be shipped.

Or worse.

The odds that Kaberle will walk next summer as a free agent and not provide any sort of return for the organization are very high. And that is a travesty that is entirely Burke's fault. For a team in the rebuilding process, any opportunity to gain players for veterans is necessary, even if it is just for a change of scenery. 

So here's to hoping that the perfect deal comes around and Kaberle waives his NTC. Even though it goes against Burke's 'morals', one can only hope that there is a bright spot in all of this. Otherwise it is going to be a long few more years until the Leafs will challenge to play beyond the second week of April.

No dice on the bandwagon

With my dear Maple Leafs eliminated from the playoffs (yes, insert all jokes here, I've heard them all I promise) I've had many people asking who I am cheering for in the playoffs. When I respond that I am cheering for the non-Canadian teams, this often warrants me a strange look, or an accusation of being 'un-Canadian'. But let's think about this realistically:

• Two of the three Canadian teams that made it to the playoffs are considered mortal enemies of the Leafs. So what really makes you think that I'm going to change my opinion on these teams just because it's the playoffs?
• I'm not a fan of bandwagoners. In fact, I really really can't stand them. I prefer loyalty over cheering for any team that's winning. And although I prefer some teams over others, simply cheering for a team in a game is not considered bandwagoning - what fun is it to watch a game when you're not cheering for someone?
• As much as I will receive backlash for this comment - I really don't think that any of the Canadian teams in the playoffs are capable of winning the Stanley Cup. Ottawa didn't have the depth in the roster, the Canucks had a clear question mark in goaltending, the same question mark they had ever since the heroics shown at the Olympics. And the Habs - well come on, you're lying if you say that you saw that coming. However, I still don't think they have what it takes to win the whole thing. I also really hope they don't in general - I won't be able to stand the obscene cheering from the hundreds of people who decided to hop that bandwagon.

So I apologize to anyone who I have offended with my so-called un-patriotic behaviour during these playoffs. Perhaps when the Leafs next make the playoffs and you're not cheering for them I will ask you the same question as to why you're not cheering for 'the Canadian teams' in the playoffs.

How To Deal.

NCAA March Madness is wrapping up the Sweet Sixteen stage, and there have been plenty of upsets to go around. When a person doesn't have a 'home team' to cheer for, they're pretty exciting to watch. Buzzer-beaters, turnovers and airballs with less than a second left have defined whether a team moves on or not. Fast-paced action, packed arenas cheering and yelling on every play. It makes you wish you were there.

Kansas and Syracuse, two number-one ranked teams, have already been upset.

Many people are upset because of brackets being busted. Some are over-the-moon excited to see their teams pull off the upsets.

For me? I'm rattled watching it. Not because of my bracket (don't have one.. maybe next year), or my team losing (Kentucky, FTW). Simply because it all hits too close to home.

Last weekend was the CIS Men's Basketball Championships (I know, you had no idea). It marked the single weekend that I have been hearing about almost on a daily basis for just about a year now.

The Carleton Ravens were defending champions, and ranked number one heading into the weekend after a somewhat up-and-down season. Everyone was saying that Carleton couldn't repeat after losing their three star players, simply saying that the talent was no longer there. The loss to York really didn't help their case.

However, they battled back. They worked hard. Looking at them, you knew that they had every ounce of determination to get back to that final game and try to repeat as champions.

But they lost in the semi-finals to Saskatchewan, a team that they had easily handled at the beginning of the season.

Watching the clock count down and seeing the Saskatchewan side of the scoreboard continue to climb, trying to do the math in your head to figure out how many possessions they have left and how many 3-pointers they're inevitably going to need.

Just waiting for "the big play".

Seeing the team come back within one point of Saskatchewan and then simply not being able to capitalize on chances to gain the lead.

It's agonizing.

And then when the buzzer goes, you think: what now? Did that actually just happen?

You want to be happy for the other team. They played a good game. They deserved it.

But seeing the other scores from the games that followed makes you a tad bitter.

That was supposed to be your team. That's not how it's supposed to go.

And then you think, what now?

Everyone has their own way of dealing with disappointment. For many, it involves copious amounts of alcohol. But I think the main thing about team sports is just knowing that there are your teammates, who are all equally as disappointed as you are. Your families and friends who were right there with you every step of the way know how much losing a big game like that sucks. They understand. They essentially went through the whole thing with you.

Personally? I think it's only going to serve as motivation for next year. For the fifth-years, it's a bitter way to go out. But the rest of the team has another crack at it, and this time with some of the pressure off. Maybe with a young team, that's just what they need.

I suppose it's all a part of the game. I mean, if we always knew who was going to win, it wouldn't be very enjoyable, would it?

... and there's always next year.

The Ongoing Debate Over Headshots

So it has been decided. Matt Cooke will not be suspended for this hit on Marc Savard on Sunday.

At the NHL GM meetings in Florida they drafted a rule to be considered for implementation next year regarding headshots. However, since that rule is not in place yet, there is no real grounds to suspend Cooke on.

No real grounds, but this is where the ethical side of the issue comes into play.

Although there is no rule against hits such as this one in place, the facts have to be considered. Savard suffered a grade 2 concussion and will likely not play for the remainder of the season.

So why should Cooke play?

If a player lays out a hit on a player causing serious injury, there should be consequences. Cooke is a repeat offender, and if you look at clips of his 'headshots' from previous games, they are all identical. Just because there is no rule specifically pertaining to headshots, there's no ethical reason why a repeat offender should not have been given a minimum of three games.

Down Goes Brown puts it best when he says that the league put themselves in this position by not creating a rule against headshots years ago. With players such as Cooke in the game, it puts many of the star players in danger, and it creates an unsafe environment for the game.

Martin St Louis has one of the best quotes from a player about this incident, saying that if Cooke isn't suspended for that hit then what exactly does warrant a suspension?

Cooke blindsided Savard. There is no doubt about that.

Savard now has a grade 2 concussion, and he is doubtful to play for the rest of the season.

This is not the first time Cooke has done something like this.

Why isn't he suspended?

'The Kid'

I made a comment on my twitter last night stating that Sidney Crosby is overrated.

Let me explain.

I at one point was yet another teenage girl swooning over the 16-year-old superstar that was named to the World Junior team in 2004. I will be the first to admit, it was a bit of an obsession. Thankfully I grew out of that phase, but I have come to understand his skill and talent on a different level (this time not based on 'how cute' he is).

Crosby has often been compared to The Great One, and rightfully so in some respects. I mean, he's only 22 and he has already captained his team to a Stanley Cup victory, and now he has scored possibly the biggest goal in recent Canadian memory (in OT, against the USA, for Olympic gold, on home soil. How much more cliche can you get?). He broke numerous scoring records during his junior career, and is always atop the NHL standings for points.

However. I still believe he is overrated.

Not overrated in the sense that he isn't as good as the hype surrounding him, just that everyone expects Crosby to be the only one who is capable of bringing home the big victories.

I saw many tweets over the past week or so saying that Crosby was essentially Canada's only hope, and that everyone was waiting for him to carry Team Canada to the gold medal game. As essential to Team Canada as Crosby was, this bugs me for a few reasons.

The Canadian Olympic roster was made up of 23 players. Three of these goalies, leaving 20 skaters who were hand picked from the NHL. This means approximately 15 of them were capable of scoring big goals (minus perhaps the Shark line, who we all know fold under pressure). Obviously they didn't quite have the lethal sniper power of the Russian team, but they were players picked to work together as a team and create offence and play the game hard on defence.

Players picked with the expectation to win Olympic Gold.

They faced some adversity. The managed to survive it. And they did this in the quarter- and semi-finals without any offensive power from Crosby.

So why was everyone pointing at Crosby saying that he was the only one who could possibly bring this team the gold medal?

Babcock's decision to let Crosby take the penalty shot originally awarded to Rick Nash in the game against Germany in the elimination round I thought was ludicrous. Here you have a player in Nash, who has spectacular offensive ability, who is in a bit of a drought. The game is already firmly in hand. Why wouldn't you let Nash take the shot and gain some confidence back, and instead put in Crosby? Other players on this team were capable too.

Canada beat Russia 7-3 in the quarter-finals. Crosby had zero points.

Canada beat Slovakia 3-2 in the semi-finals. Crosby had zero points.

Crosby's only goal came in OT of the gold medal game. Arguably the biggest goal he will ever score in his entire career. However, where is the credit for Jarome Iginla and all the work he did on the boards to ensure that Crosby had that chance to score that goal?

Crosby proved that he can answer the call when the team needs a goal most.

I still think Crosby is an amazing player.

I think he was still the easiest first pick for that Olympic roster.

I just think that everyone needs to stop focusing on Sid and give the rest of the team a little more credit for what they accomplished. He didn't carry the team through the tournament. It was a 23-man effort to win that Gold (plus the members of the Team Canada brass, trainers, doctors...)He bought into the system, working as a team to accomplish one goal. Not the Sidney Crosby Show. The Team Canada Show.

The Show that has everyone in this country hoping that Bettman will get his act together and allow the NHL players to participate in Sochi 2014.