May 7th - Beard of the Day: William Riker

by Killion on May 7, 2009 10:18 AM CDT

Rikercostume_medium

Yeah yeah, the new Star Trek movie is about the original cast - but I mostly watched The Next Generation as a kid, so Riker it is.

Riker has a solid beard and first got with Consouler Troi before being turned into a character that just kicked ass and ocassionaly slept with the hot alien chick since Picard was too busy reading or drinking tea.

Tweet Comment 32 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Evil Spock

Star Trek it is, since I know the original series better, you cannot beat Spock, the evil Spock that is.

by john62 on May 7, 2009 10:30 AM CDT reply actions

Ain't nothin' wrong with reading and drinking tea.

NOW STOP IT RIGHT HERE

by mjthor on May 7, 2009 10:33 AM CDT reply actions

It's not Star Trek

without some human running around collecting alien bedpost notches.

by russellguldin on May 7, 2009 11:04 AM CDT up reply actions

I must concur with john62, Evil Spock’s beard wins

But Riker deserves an honorable mention

Blueshirt Banter: Covering the New York Rangers

Big Blue View: Unofficial New York Giants blog

by Jim Schmiedeberg on May 7, 2009 12:19 PM CDT reply actions

I don’t want to go with just the goatee though – last game I used a questionable beard and the Hawks sucked.. no mistakes this time.

If I gain any nerd points – I wanted to use Saul Tigh from Battlestar but couldn’t find a good beard picture

Second City Hockey

by Killion on May 7, 2009 1:15 PM CDT up reply actions

Evil Spock doesn't have a beard

That’s a “Van Dyke”, which is comprised of a mustache and goatee, connected at the corners of the mouth, an also devoid of any hair along the cheek or jawline.

by McClure on May 7, 2009 1:16 PM CDT up reply actions

Example A

Windy City Hockey

by The Admiral on May 7, 2009 1:39 PM CDT up reply actions

Riker

looks like a fit version of Al from Home Improvement, with no flannel.

wait what?

by pepe126 on May 7, 2009 12:33 PM CDT reply actions

Does anyone else feel like they're on the brink of puking from nervousness?

I’m not even sure if I’ll enjoy the game tonight.

that's what she said

by Sportsgal on May 7, 2009 1:17 PM CDT reply actions

They are going to win tonight.

by Return of the Roar on May 7, 2009 1:22 PM CDT reply actions

Mostly because it is not the game I went to. :)

by Return of the Roar on May 7, 2009 1:45 PM CDT up reply actions

Fuck Luongo

We’re just three games into a 7-game series. That’s the way I’m looking at it. I don’t think we’ll play a 4th game in a row giving up the first 2 or 3 goals. If we score first—it’s a big if right now, I know—but if we score first, Couver can’t lapse into their neutral zone nap and turn the rink into a fucking opium den. They’ll have to open it up a bit … which in each of the first two games is where we saw our advantage open up, as well.

We answered the 2 poor efforts in Calgary in a spectacular way. There’s no reason to believe we can’t come out and play in a similar manner this time. Vancouver’s a good team, but control our turnovers, control the puck better behind both nets, and we can compete with anyone. And we will.

by ChicoMaki on May 7, 2009 1:43 PM CDT reply actions

You are absolutely right. They came back from a 2-0 without home ice against a more physical team. The keys to me this time around are high energy, a plan to adjust to the trap, staying out of the box, and scoring on the power play.

Have faith ye all.

by Return of the Roar on May 7, 2009 1:48 PM CDT up reply actions

I feel good about tonight's local sporting match.

Got more soul than a sock with a hole.

by chrome on May 7, 2009 1:43 PM CDT reply actions

Go Squadron!

Score a goal unit!

by russellguldin on May 7, 2009 3:59 PM CDT up reply actions

Fans getting called out...

by fellow Blackhawks blogger. He says we weren’t loud enough after Campbell scored. I’m not taking any responsibility for the Hawks playing every game from behind. I’ve invested THOUSANDS of dollars on this team, and I’m sick of them not playing up to their ability.

that's what she said

by Sportsgal on May 7, 2009 1:46 PM CDT reply actions

He's right. The fans were weak Tuesday.

Got more soul than a sock with a hole.

by chrome on May 7, 2009 1:53 PM CDT up reply actions

Bullshit

Any chance they were “weak” because the Blackhawks played like crap?

that's what she said

by Sportsgal on May 7, 2009 1:56 PM CDT up reply actions

Big chance of that. It is a two way street there.

FWIW, the fans in my section of the upper atmosphere were loud and rowdy all night. I suspect the corporate crowd in the 100 level, aside from leaving in droves with more than 5:00 in the third period, was not as participatory.

This may sound dumb, but I also think the rally towels, while a cute gesture, discourage people from clapping if they are swinging them around.

by Return of the Roar on May 7, 2009 2:05 PM CDT up reply actions

Just because you sit in the 300 level doesn't mean you're a better fan.

I sit in the 100 level with a group of people that are all passionate, knowledgeable hockey fans. not everyone in the 100 level is a corporate blow hard with free tickets. There are just as many bandwagon fans sitting in the 300 level as there are in the 100 level.

that's what she said

by Sportsgal on May 7, 2009 2:28 PM CDT up reply actions

I don’t know about “just as many”.. but it certainly true that not everyone in the 100 level is a corporate blowhard

Second City Hockey

by Killion on May 7, 2009 2:41 PM CDT up reply actions

most of the people near the glass and in the boxes are usually too busy to be watching the game. I say this from multiple first-hand experiences. “Not everyone in the 100’s is a corporate blowhard” is a true statement but MANY are.

Windy City Hockey

by The Admiral on May 7, 2009 2:50 PM CDT up reply actions

In no way was that what I was implying

My comment spoke only to the corporate crowd in the 100 level – by definition they are a subset of that group and not defining of all 100 level residents.

More to the point though, I was trying to agree with your premise that effort/results are what merit a response from the crowd.

by Return of the Roar on May 7, 2009 2:53 PM CDT up reply actions

Sorry

I just get sick of the generalities made about the people sitting in the 100 level. I paid a shit load for my tickets and yell just as loudly (if not more so) than everyone in the 300 level who spent half as much money as me.

that's what she said

by Sportsgal on May 7, 2009 2:58 PM CDT up reply actions

Totally agree with you

No matter how much hard earned money people spend for their tickets, wherever they may be at, those who have their own Benjamins invested in the hope of success for their team will get frustrated when they feel the effort was not there.

It’s kind of a cheap shot for that blogger you referenced to put the onus on the fans, as if they truly were a “seventh player” on the ice, for the piss poor performance we were treated to on Tuesday. After all, it is our investment in the team’s success – buying tickets, parking, beer, etc. – that enables a team to acquire talent that we hope will perform.

by Return of the Roar on May 7, 2009 3:07 PM CDT up reply actions

You made my point for me much better than I ever could!

Thanks for that… I think I’m especially bitter about their play for two reasons: 1. I’m unemployed and spending my severance on these tickets and 2. I know these guys can beat these a-holes.

that's what she said

by Sportsgal on May 7, 2009 3:16 PM CDT up reply actions