Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

2-22-1980

That's the thing about pro hockey players playing the past 20 some years there will never be a feeling like we had in 1980. Never again.
 
That was probably the most gut-wrenching 7 minutes of a conclusion to a sporting event I’ve ever experienced.

I was expecting the Russians to pop in three quick ones at any time throughout the game. It never happened.

Somehow I managed to avoid any prior announcement of the result, since it was on a three-hour tape delay.
 
Are we talking about the game or the movie? They still had a big game after the Ruskies. Finland was a good game too.
 
Are we talking about the game or the movie? They still had a big game after the Ruskies. Finland was a good game too.

I?m talking about the game. The Finland game was tense because they were ahead in going into the third 2-1.


TomD22 was I guess talking about the movie.
 
I?m talking about the game. The Finland game was tense because they were ahead in going into the third 2-1.


TomD22 was I guess talking about the movie.

yes, I was talking about the movie. It's the first thing I think of when I hear "Miracle on Ice"

I didn't pay any attention to hockey as a kid (I was 11 at the time). I don't even remember it happening, although I did hear about it later in life.
 
yes, I was talking about the movie. It's the first thing I think of when I hear "Miracle on Ice"

I didn't pay any attention to hockey as a kid (I was 11 at the time). I don't even remember it happening, although I did hear about it later in life.

I was going to respond to byco that I thought you were talking about the movie too.

I?m not 100% sure, but I think it?s because you refer to it as ?that movie? is what tipped me off.
 
I was going to respond to byco that I thought you were talking about the movie too.

I?m not 100% sure, but I think it?s because you refer to it as ?that movie? is what tipped me off.

To be clear, we are talking about the movie made in 2004, not the one made in 1981, which was ... a typical 80s made-for-TV movie.
 
Regardless the actually gave was a 1000 times more exciting. As much as I like Kurt Russel and he did a good job I didn't like the movie all the much. Only so much you can tell in 135 minutes. Plus there were too many inaccuracies to my liking compared to the real 1980 team.
 
Regardless the actually gave was a 1000 times more exciting. As much as I like Kurt Russel and he did a good job I didn't like the movie all the much. Only so much you can tell in 135 minutes. Plus there were too many inaccuracies to my liking compared to the real 1980 team.

The movie did what it could to capture the persona of Brooks and the dynamic between he and the team.

But, of course, the movie is no substitute to the two weeks of the US playing in 1980. I mean, once the US tied Sweden in the last 30 seconds of Game One, it was on. I was hooked.
 
The movie did what it could to capture the persona of Brooks and the dynamic between he and the team.

But, of course, the movie is no substitute to the two weeks of the US playing in 1980. I mean, once the US tied Sweden in the last 30 seconds of Game One, it was on. I was hooked.

One issue was the players didn't really like Brooks. They respected him as a coach but not really liking him.
 
One issue was the players didn't really like Brooks. They respected him as a coach but not really liking him.

That was his plan. For the players to unify in contempt of him. He was a trained psychologist.
 
To be clear, we are talking about the movie made in 2004, not the one made in 1981, which was ... a typical 80s made-for-TV movie.

My guess would be Tom Dalton didn?t see either one.

Because if he had, he probably would have posted ?I saw the old movie, but I didn?t see the new one;? or ?I saw the new movie, but I didn?t see the old one.?
 
My guess would be Tom Dalton didn’t see either one.

Because if he had, he probably would have posted “I saw the old movie, but I didn’t see the new one;” or “I saw the new movie, but I didn’t see the old one.”

Dalton saw this coming.

giphy.gif
 
Last edited:
Back
Top