THE Nick Fotiu thread

[srehm1]

[quote=BaddaBing Badda Boom;2505416]

Originally Posted by pesadillamal

There are plenty of very good posters in here that have nothing to do with any NY propaganda machine that feel he did more than simply bluster behind linesmen. You want to talk about stories? Look at what you wrote about the scrum with Wilson.



Also: With regard to the "squareoffs" you notice all the biased/detractors of NF insist that Fotiu make the first move? Why? McSorely has/had two good arms and fists, why not he take the first shot? Wilson, likewise, had ample opportunity to take a swing not only in the incident you speak of but countless more after that.

I thought Fotiu went with the square off so much-almost to a fault. It ruined fights. Look at his career-he did it so many times. he is the common denominator when it comes to these kinds of situations. The shadow boxing made him unique in that regard but with so many fights getting broken up because of his insistance on doing it so much-how can we not put more of the blame on him? It's not like wilson or others had a ton of these incidents.As for that incident with Fotiu and that scrum. I really see that as a scrum. hahahe "wilson looked away!" what is this a staring contest? That was nothing. of course this is an incident with no fight attached with fotiu involved-what a surprise we'd be talking about this instead of one of his actual fights.

for the record, I don't think fotiu picked his spots. he had a HUGE rep and he lived off it-to the point where he didn't have to fight all that much. a lot of times all he had to do was put on a show and that was enough. The problem is that it hurts him as an all-timer. I see fotiu in top-10 or top-25 lists and it's really based on 4 or 5 fights. that's it. wilson, nilan hunter holmgren and you can throw in the schoenfeld fight as well.

[BaddaBing Badda Boom]

You know if we take a look at shifts and ice time of the following: (All with a relatively low number of fights comapred to many others) I think an argument can be made that while comtemporaries logged more fights that they were on the ice a heck of a lot more than NF - Regular shifts night in night out - vice - NF who was essentially a 4th line checker who's shift (what he had) was subject to the coach's whim of replacing him for whatever reason.

So as a percentage of ice time that NF received I am willing to bet that it pailed in comparison to Wilson and Gillies - And, you are only able to fight who's ever on the ice, unless, that is if the coach specifically calls his # to go and fight someone - with a guy like Brookes (i.e.) that was not going to happen. He probbaly could have squeezed a few more fights but if you r not on the ice....

Wilson 98 fights
Gillies 73 fights
Fotiu 65 fights

[srehm1]

Originally Posted by BaddaBing Badda Boom

You know if we take a look at shifts and ice time of the following: (All with a relatively low number of fights comapred to many others) I think an argument can be made that while comtemporaries logged more fights that they were on the ice a heck of a lot more than NF - Regular shifts night in night out - vice - NF who was essentially a 4th line checker who's shift (what he had) was subject to the coach's whim of replacing him for whatever reason.

So as a percentage of ice time that NF received I am willing to bet that it pailed in comparison to Wilson and Gillies - And, you are only able to fight who's ever on the ice, unless, that is if the coach specifically calls his # to go and fight someone - with a guy like Brookes (i.e.) that was not going to happen. He probbaly could have squeezed a few more fights but if you r not on the ice....

Wilson 98 fights
Gillies 73 fights
Fotiu 65 fights

Yeah I agree about his ice time. It certainly helps to explain his low fight totals as well as not initiating a lot or gooning it up. To be honest, we have to accept these guys as they are/were. We can play "what if" and speculate all we want on what would happen had he played more or if he played for a fighter's coach like cherry but that's all it is, speculation. I still think that over a 12 year career and filling that kind of role, we should have seen more fights. that's just me though.

There were a lot of guys with low fight totals then so it is a symptom of that era. Only a handful of guys from that time were racking up the fighting majors. O'Reilly, Howatt, plett, Tiger come to mind right away as guys who fought a lot.

[I like Boobs]

Originally Posted by BaddaBing Badda Boom

Consider the source.

If you'd like to go head to head in a vote about credibility Mr verified by attic radio, than I'd be more than happy to oblige you.

Again I'm often amused by how much your memory improves after Jack posts something. When he doesn't post, like in this thread, you add even less than usual.

[I like Boobs]

Originally Posted by srehm1

Yeah I agree about his ice time. It certainly helps to explain his low fight totals as well as not initiating a lot or gooning it up. To be honest, we have to accept these guys as they are/were. We can play "what if" and speculate all we want on what would happen had he played more or if he played for a fighter's coach like cherry but that's all it is, speculation. I still think that over a 12 year career and filling that kind of role, we should have seen more fights. that's just me though.

There were a lot of guys with low fight totals then so it is a symptom of that era. Only a handful of guys from that time were racking up the fighting majors. O'Reilly, Howatt, plett, Tiger come to mind right away as guys who fought a lot.

Don't forget that Wilson retired young while putting up good numbers. Gillies was a Hall of Famer. Both guys were far better players and fought better opponents. Neither guy went entire seasons with only one fight. Gillies had low fight totals but was scoring 30-35 goals a year. Fotiu had that big 10 goal year he took his vacation.

Comparing Fotiu to those two as players, does the other players a disservice.

[BaddaBing Badda Boom]

Originally Posted by srehm1

Yeah I agree about his ice time. It certainly helps to explain his low fight totals as well as not initiating a lot or gooning it up. To be honest, we have to accept these guys as they are/were. We can play "what if" and speculate all we want on what would happen had he played more or if he played for a fighter's coach like cherry but that's all it is, speculation. I still think that over a 12 year career and filling that kind of role, we should have seen more fights. that's just me though.

There were a lot of guys with low fight totals then so it is a symptom of that era. Only a handful of guys from that time were racking up the fighting majors. O'Reilly, Howatt, plett, Tiger come to mind right away as guys who fought a lot.

Low fight totals were symptomatic of that era.

[srehm1]

Originally Posted by BaddaBing Badda Boom

Low fight totals were symptomatic of that era.

Yes but his were really low for an enforcer that played for 12 years.

[Johnny Pie]

Originally Posted by srehm1

Yes but his were really low for an enforcer that played for 12 years.

I think most posters and even some who are not posting in this thread now understand that the speculation and the fear and terror myth have been explained away with common sense. Good Posters like Howatt , Battleship can post their views and except other posters valid points. This again trying to compare Fotiu with Wilson and Gillies using their relatively low fight totals as prove is just more excuses for Nick. Nick's only reason for being dressed was his supposed fighting ability.The others were very important players for their teams. Not only that but in their low fight totals they fought top and beat top fighters something that can't be explained away for Fotiu. Of course the old nobody would fight him B.S. WILL BE USED. Gillies a hof player within his Low fight total still found time to fight Oreilly 5x, Schultz 2x, Wilson 2x, Jonathan, Secord, Mcsorley, Plett etc. Wilson the same thing multiple fights vs the very best. Fotiu along with a very low fight total has virtually no fights vs top level fighters. And No feuds and series of fights vs anyone. On top of that the main reason he was employed was to fight. Again lets just go on what actually happened in real life. He obviously does not have a track record in actual fights that rival the top 25 or so fighters.

[srehm1]

Nick Fotiu Video Profile - YouTube

[flyersvikes]

Originally Posted by srehm1

Nick Fotiu Video Profile - YouTube

He was a big boy no doubt and it is easy to see why the New York fans loved him, he seems like a humble guy too, thanks for the link srehm1.

[blockerpunch]

Pretty cool video, and some big hits too!

[mikebflorida]

I can see why it's easy to be a Fotiu fan, he's a very likeable guy, a native New Yorker, and played for the Rangers who have a lot of fans.

I don't think it changes anything about his low fight total and his odd way of squaring off for what seems like minutes at a time, a good fighter with toughness will engage even if it means taking a shot or 2. Not saying he wasn't tough but it's not boxing and he played in the era of Kevin Collins who broke up more fights than all other linesman combined so squaring off for 30-40 seconds and having a non-fight as a result simply hurts Nick's legacy.

His post Ranger career was a sad joke too, he just did nothing with the other teams he played for but he was probably crushed by getting traded away from his beloved Rangers, he just didn't seem motivated at all in Calgary and why he even signed with Philly, I'll never know.