First...read this article.
Oh, no he didn't! I found this link through "link-ception" in the Daily links, a link within a link (only one layer down). So thanks to David M Wilson for doing a superb job with these links. I really do enjoy reading your lead in's. Top notch.
There were several times I cringed while reading this article, mainly on the sheer incompetence of the writer and his apparent unwillingness to do any formal kind of research. I am curious if any of you found a similar type reaction to this?
"Every time there’s a scrum in Buffalo, Ott is in the middle of it. Is he also a battler and a vocal person in the locker room? One would assume."
Who is this guy? Seriously? Is he really surprised that the "Pepper Pot" is in the middle of most every major fracas on the ice? Remember, this is the same guy that pushed Peter Laviolette out of the way.
The question he poses "Is Ott a battler and a vocal person in the locker room?" is mind numbing. How many times did we as Stars fans (and by extension Ott fans) hear from Mike Heika, Mark Stepneski, and even on DBD what a locker room presence Otter was (and still is). Steve Ott is a great many things, but quiet in the locker room, he is not. He can't be, it isn't in his nature.
In all seriousness, I am not trying to attack this writer or his topic. I am aware that his topic is meant to rustle a few feathers and he is intending on making outlandish claims for eyeballs to be drawn to his words. It has clearly done the job he intended his article to do, as evidenced by my post here.
What this writer may not have realized when making this bombastic claim is we here in Texas and Stars fans across the globe know all too well the antics and the moronic comments that make up Sean Avery. We were here for this:
It begs the question...how many times did Stephanie Robidas want to do this to Sean Avery while he was a Star?
Apart from being taken aback by the shock someone has over Steve Ott's antics in this league at THIS point in his career and THEN mistakenly comparing them to Sean "Look-Up-Goon-In-The-Dictionary-That's-Me" Avery, I did stumble upon a topic that I wish to pose to all of you.
If Steve Ott had stayed in Dallas, would you feel OK with him being named captain after Brenden Morrow?
At the time Dallas announced "Smallish Brother" Benn as the Captain (during this years training camp, if your memory serves you), we, as fans, were fairly skeptical of his readiness for the position. While I think most of us (on this site at least) have transitioned our minds to seeing him in that role and nodding our heads in approval, there are still some who believe he still isn't ready for the "C".
The point could be made that Jamie Benn was a correct choice, not just for him or the team on the ice, but for the whole organisation and the fans perception of the team. The point could also be made that a "bridge-captain" would have benefited the team, and by extension, Jamie Benn.
Interestingly, the only reason this topic ever occurred to me is due to Buffalo first allowing Otter to be the road captain and, since the Vanek trade, the full time captain.
Here are my thoughts:
First, we can tackle this question in one of two ways, with or without hindsight. The more effective and possibly more relevant choice is without hindsight, but we can do both just for kicks and giggles. Second, we will be going on the assumption that Jim Nill would entertain the "bridge-captain" idea, and since he could have done the same thing with Robidas and didn't, it is a pretty big assumption. The argument can tangent to who would have been a better "bridge-captain" for Jamie Benn, Ott or Robidas? And are either of those two actually "captain" material? But I digress....
So many ways to think about this topic.
Have fun with it and let me know what you think.