ShareThis Page
Breakfast with Benz

Breakfast with Benz: Is Penguins-Flyers series destined for 2012-style mayhem?

| Monday, April 16, 2018, 6:45 a.m.
The Flyers' Andrew MacDonald is checked by the Penguins' Patric Hornqvist during the third period in Game 3 of the Eastern Conference First Round on April 15, 2018, at Wells Fargo Center.
Getty Images
The Flyers' Andrew MacDonald is checked by the Penguins' Patric Hornqvist during the third period in Game 3 of the Eastern Conference First Round on April 15, 2018, at Wells Fargo Center.

Mondays stink.

But this one is pretty good if you are a Pittsburgh hockey fan. The Penguins rebounded from a bad Game 2 loss to Philadelphia at home by going on the road and winning Game 3 , 5-1.

I tell you why this Penguins-Flyers series has all the makeup of the 2012 gong show, without the brutality and violence, in my daily column .

Also, Washington lost and Vegas won. So that has to bring a smile to the faces of most local hockey fans. We talked about those angles in "First Call." James Neal, Marc-Andre Fleury, and even Margot Robbie make an appearance.

Plus, does Patrick Reed ever wear something besides his green jacket?

In the sports calendar , we take a look at tonight's full slate of hockey games, and the Pirates' return to PNC Park against Colorado.

Hockey, baseball, basketball and even movies are up for debate in this week's Madden Monday podcast , too. Mark Madden tells us why the Penguins' power play is "maddeningly good," who can stay hot long term for the Pirates and whether that suspension of the Oklahoma City broadcaster is warranted.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me