It seems like these words are everywhere... all over this site, and all over any story about this team. My question is, do the Flyers really corner the market in the NHL on inconsistency? What about the 10 or so other teams that hover at or around the .500 mark, within a few points of the Flyers 82? Based on results shouldn't they all be deemed just as inconsistent?
Granted, I don't watch any other teams nearly as much as I watch the Flyers, and clearly it seems as though the effort is much more present on some nights than others, I just wonder if fans/media of these other teams feel the same way. By definition playing .500 hockey is inconsistent. You should expect that some wins would come against good teams and some losses would come against bad teams (as highlighted by the last 2 games).
It's as if (in their own minds, ie players, managment, and media) they could somehow solve this consistency issue they'd magically be contenders. That's the part I'm really tired of. Yes, this team has a few top tier NHL players but they have plenty of sub-NHL level players to more than cancel out that star power. Look no further than whoever is in the net. (you can blame injuries but I don't see the Flyers having more than 3-4 additional points in the standings had there not been injuries)
My hope is that this inconsistency talk is just lip service to placate the media and fans, and that Homer and the rest realize that they put together a team that has mediocre talent level, and that they need to start over (minus a handful of players).
Count me in the camp that says they should've blown this thing up at the trade deadline and picked up some future value rather than limp towards an early playoff exit, if they even get that far.
So, back to the question... are the Flyers significantly more inconsistent than other borderline playoff teams?