[hwy19man]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

The difference is that's the third round. There's what, one of those rivalry series that make it to round three every three years? You were guaranteed anywhere from two to five top rivalry playoff series every year from 1983-84 until 1992-93 when the NHL had two divisional playoff rounds.

Heck, Montreal played Boston every single year of that format except the final year.

1983-84

Montreal vs. Boston
Rangers vs. Islanders
Montreal vs. Quebec
Edmonton vs. Calgary

1984-85

Montreal vs. Boston
Chicago vs. Detroit
Montreal vs. Quebec

1985-86

Montreal vs. Boston
Calgary vs. Edmonton

1986-87

Montreal vs. Boston
Detroit vs. Chicago
Montreal vs. Quebec

1987-88

Toronto vs. Detroit
Montreal vs. Boston
Edmonton vs. Calgary

1988-89

Chicago vs. Detroit
Vancouver vs. Calgary
Edmonton vs. Los Angeles
Pittsburgh vs. Philadelphia
Montreal vs. Boston

1989-90

Boston vs. Hartford
Islanders vs. Rangers
Minnesota vs. Chicago
Montreal vs. Boston
Edmonton vs. Los Angeles

1990-91

Edmonton vs. Calgary
Boston vs. Hartford
Montreal vs. Boston
Edmonton vs. Los Angeles

1991-92

Devils vs. Rangers
Edmonton vs. Los Angeles
Montreal vs. Boston
Chicago vs. Detroit
Edmonton vs. Vancouver

1992-93

Montreal vs. Quebec
Toronto vs. Detroit

The divisional playoff format actually began in the 1982 playoffs, after the 1981-82 regular season. I am on the fence for realignment and I understand the arguments for each side. I agree that the Montreal-Boston annual playoff series is terrific. I was too young to know what was going on until the late 1980's but I know as I got older and was able to understand how the format worked, many of my father's friends were saying it would be even better if the Habs and Bruins could play each other in the semi-finals (conference finals, round 3).

There were more and more calls on Sportstalk radio wanting to change the format because it would have been epic to have the battle of Alberta played out in the conference finals. The same was said for teams in the Norris and Patrick Division such as the Islanders-Rangers. Other guests and fans had said that some other series were getting boring because it was the same teams over and over.

I remember reading in the Hockey News magazine that while the first two rounds were excellent, critics were saying that the third round was anti-climactic or the forgotten round. It lacked the earlier intensity mainly due to the lack of a rivalry. The fans wanted that round over and done with to get on with the Stanley Cup finals. The critics also pointed out that it would be nice to spark new rivalries by adopting the present format. This allowed for the Bruins-Flyers to be resurrected along with Vancouver-Chicago and Detroit-Colorado to take off. The weirdest rivalry that happened was the Oilers-Stars, five times in seven years.

During the 2010 playoffs, fans of the Bruins and Habs were hoping the Bruins could have swept or finished off the Flyers. It would have been an amazing Habs-Bruins eastern final, 31 years since Don Cherry got fired for losing to the Habs in the third round. The Flyers pulled off the impossible which set up for a less than exciting semi-final.

It would be nice to have some of those series again but, looking back at the divisional playoff format for the Smythe Division, the Canucks and Oilers only played each other twice and same with the Jets-Canucks. The Jets and Kings never did play against each other.

For the Adams Divison, the battle of New England (Whalers-Bruins) happened only twice and apparently was not that big of a deal. The Sabres and Whalers never played each other.

The Norris Division had the North Stars play Detroit and Toronto each just once.

The Patrick Division had the Islanders play the Devils once.