[CaptainCrunch]

I'm going to argue counter to the initial dissertation, because I'm old and I was actually watching hockey back in the late 70's and early 80's. And then you young people will get off of my lawn and spread my wisdom.

Why is this current streak more impressive then the one by the Atlanta Flames

1) Talent - frankly there is no comparison of talent. Back in the late 70's expansion had taken a bite out of teams talent rosters. This happened because the full European influx hadn't happened. The Iron curtain was still up and we weren't seeing the flood of Russians, and various slovakians and even the European's weren't coming over in massive floods. Even USA hockey was kind of crappy and we American's were almost a rarity. Because of that most of the NHL players came from Canada and lineups were a lot weaker. The bottom pairing defensemen and the fourth lines were filled with barely able to lumber cement heads. Because of that you saw a lot more in the way of mismatches that coaches could take advantage of.

Today we are getting hockey players from all over the world. The emphasis has switched over to having actual hockey players throughout your lineup. You can't have a team that has a fourth line that sits on the bench until war breaks out. A fourth line and third line in terms of checking ability and pure physical skills have the capability of being matched up with top two lines and checking them into oblivion.

2) Coaching tactics - Back in the day your average shift was probably close to 2 minutes, because of that players towards the end of their shifts were pretty much worn out. Now if a shift goes longer then 45 seconds its either a player pulling a stupid move. Because of that the games have a higher level of compete and a higher level of speed and execution and there is more even play throughout the whole game.

In terms of coaching, I'm sorry but the coaches are just plain better nowdays. Now I'm not begrudging the Super Coaches of those days, but lets be honest, the education level of the coaches and coaching development is just plain better. While you get ex-players coaching today they are lavishly trained and not just thrown behind the benches like they were in the old days. We've seen what happens when you hope a coach learns on the job in the modern Era (Yeah I'm looking at you Wayne). You get a badly prepared coach who just plain looks bad. In the late 70's coaches were thrown behind the bench more for their names then their training

3) Goaltending - Not even close to todays era. Back in the day, you could have a one eyed goaltender with no depth perception as a starter (Garrett). Backup goalies were usually pretty horrible because again there just weren't that many good goalies to support a 21 league team as opposed to a decade earlier where there were 6 spots. Goalies were also puny and their equipment was tiny. They were told to stand up and hope the puck hit them. They were also usually the weirdo's of the team with the worst conditioning on the team. This was the slapshot era as well where goals were going in from everywhere on the ice. Nowdays it takes a miracle to score at times. And the goalies that we call garbage nowdays are far more evolved then the goalies from then.

4) Player conditioning and coaching - Not even close. The usual conditioning for players in the summer back then were some pushups, job three miles cut back during the season from a pack a day to a half pack a day. Preparation wasn't even close, they didn't have much in the way of video sessions for preparation, their pregame meal was a thick steak and a beer. Now from top to bottom the players are physical machines lavishly coached and conditioned . On off days back in the late 70's players were more then likely to have McDonald's for breakfast, A bar and grill for lunch and a half dozen beers and for dinner, a couple of asprin and a steak with fries.


5) The lack of OT, sure it didn't exist back there so you had the possibility of a tie. However now you have OT so there has to be a winner or loser and losing in OT in 3 on 3 gimmick matches I believe are easier to lose. Its harder for a bad team in the late 70's to tie against a superior opponent then for a bad team to get possession in OT and score.

Lets face it, in the modern era( you know this one) the teams are better, deeper, better coached and better conditioned. Its easier to lose an OT game then to tie a regulation game that's why you see teams having 12 or 13 ties at max. Also teams tend to try to force OT in the modern era because of the easier way of winning in OT or a shootout. Also lets face it, more goalies back then were horrific in nature and it didn't matter if they were screened on a slapshot from the point or not, they didn't have a chance.


This streak is impressive because its happened in a more evolved NHL.

Thus endeth the lesson.