Quote:
Originally Posted by MattyC
Every team will have periods of 4-5 years where they struggled. People forget Washington's struggles because they are part of the normal cycle of sports teams.
The Oilers have a decade of not only struggles, but historic ineptitude not just relative to hockey, but ALL SPORTS. Not only that, but a period of utterly comical management, overhyped prospects, and nothing but pure smugness about how great their team would/could/maybe be if they just kept losing - a mentality that flies in the face of the core point behind competitive sports: to win.
And now, because of all that smugness, it could only POTENTIALLY be forgotten with wins. Championship wins. And yes, specifically for Flames fans any championships the Oilers attain will always have an asterisk, but the whole hockey world has been laughing at the Oilers for years. Not just because they were bad, but comically bad.
|
Aside from duration, how are Washington's bottom-5 finishes between 2003-2007 any different than the Oilers between 2009-2016?
IIRC, the Oilers 10-year playoff drought is still eclipsed by droughts in other sport teams such as the Minnesota Timberwolves or Buffalo Bills. If anything they're a lot like the Oakland Raiders in the sense that they spend a decade + outside the playoffs after going to the championship game (SCF Game 7, Superbowl). But then again, Derek Carr is a lot more likable than Connor McDavid.
Again, you're just being overly subjective and interpolating your Flames goggles. No one is going to care about the asterisk we have next to their (hypothetical) success if they ever have any. The hockey world forgot all about the comical ineptitude of the Penguins in the 2007 playoffs; the bankruptcy, the relocation woes, the half-decade of lottery finishes, the lack of fan support. They didn't consult with Flyers, Rangers, or Capitals fans as to what they thought about Sid and Co.