Oh Captain, My Captain

Rogers' Sportsnet is a multi-faceted media contingent, spanning radio, TV, and more recently-- the print world. Their Sportsnet Magazine has a collector's edition out now call "The Captains: Ranking the Greatest Leaders in Hockey History." Yes, like so much Bleacher Report, the fantastic heads at Sportsnet got people together to make the ultimate list of captains all of the NHL and rank them 1 to 30. You can just tell how great subjective lists can be....

Strap in, folks-- it's about to get fun.

Alright, so they start off well enough, picking Montreal Canadiens' Jean Beliveau as the all-time top captain. Can't argue with that-- the statistics that Beliveau put up, the style of play he had, the fact that off the ice he very accommodating to the media and fans; he has to be there at the top spot because of how well-rounded he was both on and off the ice. So far, so good.

Number two on the list: Mark Messier.

The whole thing of lists is that....they'll be very subjective most of the time. This is a case where I think it holds true. Rangers' fans will always bring up 1994 and his guarantee and how he stepped up in the clutch to help bring the Rangers their first cup in 54 years. Fine, I get that and can appreciate that-- but in the history of captains, the fact he is SECOND on the list is somewhat of a head-scratcher. Especially when you at the guys in the third, fourth, and fifth spot (Gordie Howe, Wayne Gretzky, and Steve Yzerman), I don't know how you can say that Messier is above them. Top-five?? Maybe depending on who you talk to. Top-ten?? Sure, I'll give you that if only for winning two Cups as captain.

Phil Esposito, Denis Potvin, Maurice Richard, Bobby Clarke, and Bobby Orr are the others in the top-ten, which, again-- the subjective nature of things and what they were able to do in their era with the team they had an the teams they went up against will always make the question of their positioning debatable.

Here's a shot of who is numbers 11 through 30:

The crazy thing about this is that Sidney Crosby is on this list. Sure, I don't doubt he'd be on a revisited list, but my belief that any active player should not be on the list. If you put Crosby there, why not put Jonathan Toews on that list?? The only other active player is Jarome Iginla-- but no Daniel Alfredsson or Nicklas Lidstrom or Joe Thornton or whoever??

More over, where's guys like Rod Langway, Trevor Linden, Doug Gilmour, Wendel Clark, or countless others. Dave Bidini, the go-to hockey musician, historian, and noted author, did an entire essay on guys who did get snubbed from this list and you could go on forever. Especially when you cut it off at 30, you know you're going to have omissions and this won't be definitive. In which case, why put it out??

The only good thing about this all is the inclusion of two women captains (Cassie Campbell [27] and Cammi Granato [30]), as well as going very old school with the likes of Eddie Shore, Syl Apps (19), Bill Cook (20), and King Clancy (26); as well as foreign innovators like Boris Mikhailov (17) and Sven Tumba (29), neither of whom played in the NHL at all-- so respect is given there.

This is an edition that's going to spark some chatter and counterpoints to each point make for each captain's position. Even so, there's sometimes where you can go off the wall in a good way or a bad way-- this instance....it could have been more of a hinderance than a help.

Friday Five: New Year, New Problems

Hope all of you had the greatest New Year's ever and all those shenanigans. However, the Friday Five is the auld acquaintance that'll never leave. Or something....I've got nothing.

1. Martin Brodeur has been riding the pine in lieu of Johan Hedberg, and for good reasoning. Are we witness the burnout of Brodeur before our eyes??

It's quite the issue on whether this is just a bad year for Brodeur and the Devils or the ravages of age and overuse catching up to the modern-era's greatest goalie in wins. The Devils aren't doing much to help him out in front of him and it seems that the karma is getting back to the Devils quicker than expected, as all the bounces aren't going their way at all. That said, we are definitely seeing a changing of the guard with the Devils-- which probably won't include Hedberg, but the point is that the goaltending department will have a big shake-up in Jersey and this is the first process rearing its ugly head.

2. While the Islanders were doing well for a while there, their goaltending issues could be their downfall-- was it foolish to get rid of Dwayne Roloson this early??

The Isles are a streaky team this year and could end up with a close to .500 record if they can even out their hot and cold streaks. However, with their tandem of Nathan Lawson and Kevin Poulin until Rick DiPietro gets healthy again; this is not good news. The Isles could have jumped the gun for dumping Roloson, but what other option did they have?? They had to sell high and try to get what they could get-- which isn't much for a 41-year-old goalie. Garth Snow did what he was told, which could have compromised the hot streak they were having heading into their Western swing.

3. The Winter Classic was all the rage and covered a lot during the week. Final thoughts??

It was a classic battle and it was a great boost for the League. Even so, the question is where's the next one and with the weather as it was-- squashes any argument to not have it in one of the Sunbelt cities. Dan Craig is a magician and he can do what's needed in order to put a game in a market that needs a gimmick like this to draw attention to the team would could be struggling otherwise.

4. Back to Jersey, Jamie Langenbrunner has cleaned out his locker and waiting to see where his next destination is. How painful is it to be sitting around like that and how much of a shot to ego is it to just be waiting there for commands??

It's definitely a shot to the ego when you're the captain and they go to you first before anyone else to move. Yet, I would almost think it's a reprieve from purgatory and maybe a fresh start from the hell that is New Jersey. Yet, in this world of technology, it's got to sting to know that you're out because you're waiting for a trade rather than just a mysterious injury. That said, it's a great look into the process of how it happens and how long it takes to finalize a deal with all the clauses that have to be overcome in order to achieve a trade.

5. Brayden Schenn swept most of the awards at the WJC despite his teams' monumental collapse and playing on a separated shoulder. With him going back to junior, which way could his motivation go??

Schenn is going back to a dismal Brandon Wheat Kings team and Schenn could be a little put off from going to an extreme high like the Canadian juniors then back to a team that's last in their division. However, you have to figure that Schenn won't dog it, mostly due to wanting to make the LA Kings notice that he's ready for the next step. He didn't seem to lose a step when he went back to juniors and showed he has the ability to play big at the WJC. We'll see how well Schenn does when he gets back from injury-- but the Kings probably did the right thing sending him back, rather than having him rot in the press box.

---------

That's another week in the books and I hope you enjoyed it as much as I did-- and I know you did. If you didn't, email me at Scotty.Wazz@Gmail.com with some suggestions on what you want to see in the F5; topic wise or whatever.

Critiquing the Caps

Ever since I saw my first game on February 3rd, 1989 when Bengt Gustafsson scored the only goal against Mike Liut of the Hartford Whalers (on Gustafsson "shirsey" night, no less), I was a Caps fan. And when being a Caps fan, heartache seems to happen all the time. Lest we forget the Patrick Division playoffs when the Penguins always came back from being down 3-1 to win, but it just comes with the territory.

Yet, with all the history of heartache, why are the fans taking this eight-game losing streak so hard and why is the second guessing of everything and everyone associated with the Capitals organization??

Is the coaching of Bruce Boudreau finally reached its peak and it's time to move on??

Everyone loves Boudreau, which could make it hard to fire him and could cause a wave of backlash. However, if it seems to have reached its cresendo; you have to make a move. I don't think that it's at that point yet, but the first guy to go will probably be Boudreau since coaches are more easily expendable than anything else. As it seems that the Caps are trying out a new system of play, there's going to be some leeway; but at what point does Boudreau abandon the new style of play??

The idea of the new system of defense is something that will take time to get used to, especially since this is a team that's been a run-and-gun team for the past couple of seasons, so the adjustment will be a noticeable one, especially when they've been know to play the old firewagon hockey style. The players won't be as dynamic, the play will not be as exciting, and the team will show off their weaknesses when it comes to trying to adhere to the new system, but not knowing how to blend one style into another. They seem to be too concerned with sticking to the defensive side, they completely forgot about the offensive side of things. They just need one break, though.

Speaking of offense, the one big thing is the lack of offense from Alex Ovechkin. Many have even called for Ovechkin to either give up or get stripped of his captaincy for not being a leader. Before I go ahead, I'll say always that the team's best player doesn't need to be the captain, because they may lack a leadership quality. It's not a bad thing for the best player to not have the captaincy. In any case, Ovechkin seemed to do well with the captaincy when he got it after Chris Clark was traded to the Blue Jackets. The Caps and Ovechkin did an amazing job that first year, why are people calling for Ovechkin to not have the "C" anymore?? Are there any better leaders on that team?? Maybe, but at the same time-- those are the folk-hero players that fans like for one reason or another and probably won't do better than what Ovechkin is doing. It's just a bad run of luck for the team and they need a break-- especially Ovechkin, Nick Backstrom, and Alex Semin.

If nothing else the idea of the team buying into their own media hype that's killing them. Green is in National TV commericals, Ovechkin's got his own DVD and clothing line, Boudreau had his own book-- the fact people picked them to go all the way maybe had them buy into the fact they don't have to play the season now and will have things handed to them. Add the hype to the system change, to the bad breaks-- recipe for disaster.

In the end, there has to be an end to this streak one of these days and it could spark the Caps into the big run that'll help them get back into their old ways. However, Jonny P said on the December 15th Show that it's better to have this losing streak and system change now, rather than late in the season when they're trying to gear up for the playoffs. If there's a time to come up and stick with a New Year's Resolution, it's for the Caps to snap out of these losing ways and actually become the team every pundit and fans thought they could be this season.

Fixing the ASG

According to TSN's guru Darren Dreger, the All-Star Game process will be fixed in a way that the captains of the two sides will be picking their own team. This way, the players will be in control of the roster where "game recognizes game."

The best part about this is the exclusion of the fans from this process. On The Show and in the media for years, we've talked about the stupidity of fans when it comes to voting. Especially with the internet being as popular as it is today, campaigns like "Vote for Rory," where Rory Fitzpatrick would get voted onto the All-Star team; and now more recently with a possible "Vote for BizNasty" which would be the same by with Paul Bissonnette, it's proof positive that the fans don't take it seriously.

And they shouldn't have to.

But at the same time, you'd think they'd want some kind of respectible roster for this glorified shiny game; but since it is a shiny game in the end-- you can't be surprised or repulsed by the mockery they make of the once prideful exhibition. The game itself doesn't have the same shine it used to have and when people get tired of it-- they'll do anything to wreck it or to at least get it noticed that it needs to get fixed in some fashion or another. You'd think that the NHL would get it and the fan's mockery would give the game a whole overhaul.

Not so much.

But the captain's picking the team is somewhat of a change. Whether it's a step in the right direction or not, who's to say-- but it's a step. The next thing is to do something to make it meaningful again because there's no such thing as conference pride. I doubt the MLB model, where the winner is the home-team of the Stanley Cup final, will be what curses it all and give it meaning; but something more needs to be done. While this is a solid change, more has to be done about it. I also don't think putting it as the Winter Classic would work because it'd limit the options the places that could hold it....though with technology, it could be anywhere, I'm sure. Plus, it'd take out an outdoor regular season game-- which would be so bad in the end and the picking of the teams would bring back the pick-up aspect.

In any case, the captains would have to live and die with their decision and it'll create some more interesting subplots if they selected a player over another more qualified player. Also, does this mean that each team has to be represented it or does that go out the window now and it's pretty much free reign?? Granted-- picking from 15 teams shouldn't be too hard, but in the same breath-- if you're put under the gun to pick someone from a non-star-studded team over a player who's decent but already has a representative from their team-- it'd be rough to deal with the perimeters.

The best part about this, the game could have players everyone can enjoy rather than fans picking a player based on an internet meme. While we all enjoy the hilarity aspect of an often healthy scratch or fringe player being a starter in the ASG, it definitely signaled the need for change to the whole ASG format. Maybe this is the start of a complete overhaul or if this is the complete overhaul, but at least some kind of steps are being made.....or not-- it's hard to tell for now.

Now You "C" Them, Now You Don't

Personally, I can't remember who said it; but someone on the Twitter made a comment about if NHL teams didn't have a captain on their roster, would anyone notice?? This was in direct response to the craziness that broke today that La Presse knows that Brian Gionta will be named the new captain of the Montreal Canadiens, the second American to have the honor. That has not been confirmed by the Canadiens themselves, but it's probably going to come out in the next little while here.

Now, the comment made by someone I'm following was interesting and something that is very thought provoking, especially considering that there have been many teams without a captain for a while and didn't seem to be in any hurry to have a captain. The Canucks, Thrashers, Oilers, Sharks, and Ducks are looking for a captain, the Wild and Blue Jackets had rotating captaincy for the longest time before they settled on one person just recently to carry the letter. The Maple Leafs went without a captain for years because they didn't see anyone with the ability to do that until Dion Phaneuf came along. With that out there, what kind of importance or is there any importance to the captaincy anymore??

The captains role used to be about having a veteran presence on the team to be the leader of the team and be able to motive players, especially the younger ones, into playing as a cohesive unit. There's seve teams with captains who are going to be 25-and-under at the start of the season: Dustin Brown, Eric Staal, Jonathan Toews, Alex Ovechkin, Sidney Crosby, Mike Richards, and Shea Weber. Granted, Staal and Brown will turn 26 within the first two months of the season; but still the point is that the younger guys are getting more respect over the veterans; which makes you wonder if it means something due to older vets getting overlook for the same position.

Plus, the topic of alternate captains is getting out of hand, too. It seems the ridiculousness of having everyone on the team have an alternate captaincy is more absurd than the question of who's going to be the next captain. It used to be that you have only two alternates, but now you see three and four guys have the "A" stitched to the front of their jerseys-- the Blue Jackets having six alternates, many of which switch on and off between home and road games. It's almost crazy the amount of people who actually have these letters on there.

On top of all of this, the fact almost anyone can chirp at the officials nowadays; the role of the captain seems very diminished from what it once was. Even so, the fact you have plenty of leaders in the locker room and on the ice that don't have anything attached to the front of the jersey; what's the true need for a captain to be identified?? There are so many teams with veterans on the ice who know what to do already, they shouldn't be discounted for not having a letter on their jersey and I doubt they're getting motivated by the young captains because they are probably giving the young kids advice on how to be a leader and what to do in certain situations.

Therein lies the rub, you have the captains getting advice from a veteran. If you're the captain, shouldn't you be the one who is the go-to guy with advice rather than getting advice. You can't believe that Mike Richards or Sidney Crosby knew everything that there is to know about leading a team, so they went to their many veteran teammates for help. It's hard to have a respect factor of the captaincy when the supposed leader is being taught how to be led. It's not a knock on Richards or Crosby because they should have gone to the veterans for advice, but it's a knock on the organizations for giving the captaincy to the youngsters, when they aren't going anywhere and should be given the time to learn the league before bestowing the official leadership on him. Another topic is that of having official leadership over unofficial leadership-- but I think the point is there in my rambling.

In the end, odds are we'll still see captains out there and we'll still have debates on who should and shouldn't be given that honor. Debates will rage on when someone gets stripped of the captaincy and then gets traded, but in the end-- it's a topic that really shouldn't matter. Yes, they are technically the leader of the team officially, but the captains are really just figureheads. If not for the tradition of hockey having it, it could have probably been obsolete by now. I mean, hockey the only sport with the big tradition of captaincy, as many other sports have just started recognizing it, like the NFL and some MLB teams. Does it really matters who's captain?? Probably not, which is why it's starting to really become as relevant as cassette tapes and VHS. The best players will always be the spotlighted guys and be the most talked about players regardless of if they have a letter or not and you'll always have guys who are going to be considered leaders of the team even if they have a letter or not.

However, the best players aren't often captain material either; but that's another rambling rant for another time.

The Direction of Dion

The big announcement came yesterday in Toronto, the one that was going to change the way people look at the Leafs roster. Something that was about three seasons in the making and something that was whispered about for a while, but finally made official on Monday.

They'll have a shoulder patch and stripes at the hem of the jersey.

Oh, and Dion Phaneuf is a the new captain of the Toronto Maple Leafs.

Now, GM Brian Burke said that Phaneuf was the best choice for the role and knew it when he traded for him. Many will say that Phaneuf got the role for the lack of anything else on the roster that could be considered for the captaincy, therefore-- Phaneuf wins by default. Either way, the dealing is done and Phaneuf is the 18th captain for the Maple Leafs and the first in two seasons since Mats Sundin left the team.

The question isn't really if Phaneuf has the credentials to be the captain for the Leafs. He was an alternate captain for the Calgary Flames for a time and he does have enough skills to warrant being a captain. While Burke said that Phaneuf did bring a vocal aspect of leadership to the Leafs room, which may or may not have happened in Calgary, depending on what story you listen to; he does have times where he leads by his actions whether with a big check or dropping the mitts to shift momentum. In all those aspect, you can say that Phaneuf does have what it takes through his play.

The biggest issue is whether or not Phaneuf can mentally take the role of captain for the Toronto Maple Leafs. We all know, the Toronto media is cutthroat and can love you at one moment, but try to run you out of town the next. Phaneuf did seem to be shaky when it came to criticism when dealing with the Calgary media; how will he be able to deal with 100 times that much pressure and criticism when he's in arguably the toughest market to play in?? Odds are if he gets down in the dregs and is there for a while, the heat will be on and the test of character will come through and determine if he was the right choice over having a vacated once again.

It says nothing of the 26 games, because when you trade for someone like Phaneuf; who does have a solid resume behind him; you know what you're getting and don't have to play the loyalty card to someone who may or may not be cut out for it or may not be there for the start of the season due to possible trades. Plus, it's not like they're giving it to a rookie; it's a guy who has been considered as a Norris Trophy candidate at one point and does have a lot of solid upside to him. If you have that, then the lack of games with the franchise really shouldn't matter.

In the end, the real test is going to be whether or not the new captain can take the heat from the media if the team is doing badly or he himself is doing badly. Phaneuf did have the chance to see what Jarome Iginla was able to do with the pressure when he was hounded by the media, though the personality types of Iginla and Phaneuf are night and day. Also, he'll have a decent amount of old Leafs around the area to get some pointers from if/when the heat is on. It will be another interesting sidebar to watch for the Leafs this year after, I'm sure, a whirlwind summer for the club. The one thing you can say is even when the chips are down-- Toronto keeps themselves in the fracas.

The Captaincy Conundrum

Eric Staal was named the Carolina Hurricanes captain today. My question is why now--- why not two years ago?? While Rod Brind'Amour should be commended for his years of service in the NHL and the lore behind him, in this day-in-age, it's almost a lead by example kind of role. This is why you saw young guns like Mike Richards and Jonathan Toews being named captain early on because they are character players.

Yet, you have to wonder how many times the captaincy change is long overdue. The Southeast Division alone has had two captaincy changes that have seemingly been long overdue. The Staal situation this time and a few weeks back Chris Clark getting traded from Washington, thus giving the captaincy to Alex Ovechkin-- with Clark being the stop-gap of captains so that Ovechkin got more comfortable with the language and leadership role. Both you could almost see happening at anytime, with some saying (especially in the Caps situation), the team already belonged to the next in line and it was a matter of time. At least in the Caps case, they traded him away. You have to wonder what will happen in the Canes locker room with Brind'Amour still being there-- maybe peering over at Staal and putting him under a microscope at every turn. While Brind'Amour may have had veto power and not used it, you can still bet there's something stewing deep inside him that's not sitting right.

While a stop-gap is alright, it almost seems like a slight to the guy you name captain. In Clark's case, everyone knew that it was Ovechkin's team; but why did they have to put the "C" on him?? It could have been due the youth of the team needing some kind of figurehead and Clark was the most experienced one there. What makes it interesting is the cases of the Montreal Canadiens and Toronto Maple Leafs of this season, where they have no captain. They have guys who could be put into that role, but yet-- nothing has come from it. Does that speak to the lack of leadership the vets on that team have or that they don't want one guy to stand out on a team full of leaders?? Obvious, the examples could be fit to the teams very easily if you think about it.

How do you know if a captain has worn out his welcome and when does it start becoming a distraction?? Most of the times, the captain get striped of his "C" due to fights with management, like Alexei Yashin in Ottawa, just being replaced by new blood like Mike Modano in Dallas, or the coach calling a player out like in Patrick Marleau's case this past summer in San Jose. Other than that-- it's almost due to the captain leaving to free agency, retirement, or in a somewhat rare case-- trade, where a captain loses his "C" from a team he was on. At least in Marleau's case, it woke him up for the regular season, but the true test for him will be in the playoffs. As far as wearing out a welcome, how much of a shot in the arm is it for the team, especially knowing they let their leader down. If the captain isn't safe from being targeted, you can only imagine how the players feel when it comes to whether or not they will be next to be called out, demoted, or even sent off the team.

Conversely to letting your captain down, what if the captain let the team down?? The fact of the matter is that Brind'Amour's play has been subpar at best in the past few seasons and really shouldn't have be a surprise that he could be wearing down physically. This is obviously a move that was in the making, but you would have only hoped that Brind'Amour would have been the one to announce he was stepping down as captain, rather than having the Canes management go up and almost run him down, so to speak, when it comes to stripping him of the captaincy.

By the way, the longest serving captain to date is Daniel Alfredsson since the 1999-2000 season.

While it's good for teams to actually excel their young stars into the leadership role, there's much better ways to do it than to trade away or strip your current captain of their role. Especially to do it mid-season, it has the ability to shake-up a teams psyche for the better or worse-- which is a delicate balance. Luckily, for the recent changes-- the Caps seemed to know the change was going to happen and were over it pretty quickly, while the Canes season couldn't get much worse. Even so, it may set a bad precedent for possible changes down the line.

C-ing is Believing

The IIHF's website has a good story up about the five vacancies in captaincy across the NHL. With trades, retirements, and just the general lack of captain in the first place leaves most of these teams without leadership. Of course, in some cases, the case could be made off the ice as well, but I digress.

To start off in Colorado, I have a bit of agreeance with the idea of handing the leadership over to Paul Stastny, who seems to be the heir-apparent anyway. Of course, you could make a case for John-Michael Liles being the top-dog, but you wonder if he could be around for much longer. As well, you could say that Adam Foote could take over for one more year before possibly heading into the sunset and then handing it over to Stastny. With the mess Colorado is in, you may wonder why they'd give it to someone as young as this to deal with the wreckage in front of them, which is why Foote or Liles could be a logical choice since they know the system just a little better.

With the Leafs, you wonder why they float out the idea of Luke Schenn. Sure, he's the future captain of the Leafs, but the fact of the matter is that it's another case of young players in a disaster zone. Tomas Kaberle is a choice, but you wonder if he could be a leader given him being floated out there as trade-bait, of course who knows how long he'll stick around. Jason Blake could be a last-ditch effort, but at the same time-- may as well give it to Schenn or leave it vacant once again.

I was surprised that Nathan Horton wasn't named captain last year. With Jay Bouwmeester out of the fold, you'd expect him to be the franchise player of the Panthers, since he's been highly touted by the team. He seems like he's older than his age dictates and could be in a solid roll as a captain right now. Horton seems to be well liked by Peter DeBoer, but the issue of healthy and dependability could come into play. With David Booth stepping it up in the last two seasons and playing very consistent hockey, he could be a darkhorse to come out with the "C" in FLA.

The Islanders have been given everything else to John Tavares, but I think the captaincy is a ways off, even for him. If you want to go in a transitional route, Doug Weight would be the guy you would go for, since he has been in that position before. Maybe you could go the way of Trent Hunter, someone who has been with the team and could have some leadership qualities still left in him. Mark Streit has a long-term deal and may be thrown into the leadership role, but who knows what kind of voice he'd have in the room. I'd throw Brendan Witt's name into the mix, but I wouldn't be able to write an explanation with a straight face.

With the most interesting draw, it could go to the Montreal Canadiens. While you may think right off the bat that Andrei Markov would be the heir to Saku Koivu's captaincy, who knows what the hell could happen when it comes to this team, especially with all changes they have made this off-season. Roman Hamrlik is a long-shot in the whole thing, but could be considered for the role. Doubtful that Scott Gomez will get a look, but you never know. Jacques Martin may look to the new guy in a new city with a new look team to be the face of the team for now.

This should be an interesting choice and I'm sure the leader will be beaten down, when choosen, if he can't lead his team to the big wins or the playoffs. Whether or not the pressure will be on them to succeed all depends on which market and the outlook from the start of the season based on last year. This is a fancy time for hockey now.......because nothing is going on and big speculations happen to pass the time.

Publicity 101 or Should Goalies Be Able To Wear The "C"??

If there's one way to create a buzz throughout the blogosphere and hockey media (some can say it's one in the same), it's to buck tradition and go all out. It's worked for the Tampa Bay Lightning and their craziness this summer and it seems to be creating a buzz now as the Vancouver Canucks named Roberto Luongo team captain, making him the first "official" captain since Bill Durnan in '47-'48 to come from the goaltending fraternaty.

Granted, it's really only a sentimental pick, as Luongo can't wear the "C" or talk to the officials or take ceremonial face-offs-- that'll be left up to alternate captains Willie Mitchell and Mattias Ohlund.

However, it begs the question whether or not goaltenders should be allowed to wear the "C" if they are deserving of it. Honestly, on teams where there are no other solid options-- why the eff not?? Had the Capitals known about this a few years back, they could have been the ones who made this buzz by naming Olaf Kolzig captain. At that point, the Caps could have used all the publicity they could have used.

Though, there's the Pandora's Box thought that many teams will do the trend of naming goalies captains to get the buzz going when there are others on the team more deserving of the honor of being named captained.

That said, I can't think of many team who would consider their goalie their leader on the team. Just thinking through the squads and those who haven't named captains, I wouldn't pick the goalie on any of those teams that would actually think the goalie would be a viable option. Most team wouldn't have thought about the goaltender wearing the "C" unless they were in real dire straits, much like the Caps were back after the lockout happened in '05.

Yet, the underlying question is why is this rule still on the books?? I understand that goalies can't come past the blue line to dispute a call, but come on-- the fact of the matter is that many goalies shout at the refs on a goal call or possible interference, so it's almost old hat for them. And thinking about it, that's why they have alternates, to do things that the captain can't really do-- and begs the question of if there's a captain; why have alternates?? Okay, maybe that's a little extreme, but the NHL has done away with some archaic rules as it is and seem to be able to change the rulebook at their will, so why not take out this 60-year-old rule that doesn't seem to fit.

So, should goalies be able to wear the "C"?? Of course, why shouldn't they?? If we can put electronics in pucks to make them light up, if we can use NASA to make the lightest sticks possible, and if Chris Chelios can continued to be re-signed; goalies should be able to wear the "C" on their jerseys.

Luongo can take solice in a couple things to come from this. First, since he plays almost every game, it's pretty solid of him to be named captain because he'll be out there more often than not, especially now. Second, it shows his true worth to the team and make him think about wanting to jump ship when the chips are down in the Canucks season. Finally, he'll at least have one "C" on his jersey thanks to the orca logo on the Canucks jerseys.