I think a lot of it comes down to your age for each Olympics. Or just where you are in your life. I can't make a logical argument why either 02 or 2010 are bigger than the other, but for me 2002 just felt bigger. The storylines, the drought, having our own up and comer (Iginla) playing such a huge role on a team of legends. It had it all.
But 2010 was also amazing.
The Following User Says Thank You to sa226 For This Useful Post:
Yes, some people are hating blindly because of NHL affiliations. However he wasn't the one who drove his line. That was Celebrini. It isn't unfair to expect more from the player who is supposed to be the best in the world.
I say it's unfair to expect McDavid to be better than what he has been, the best player at the tournament.
I'm old. I went and saw Canada play the US in 81, and went to watch Canada play USSR in 84. For me, I would rank my favorites as 2010, then 87, then 2002.
The data centers use an exorbitant amount of water in their cooling systems. AI art, videos, memes are generally worse on your brain than a direct hit from a baseball bat but it's just a waste of water too.
__________________ MMF is the tough as nails cop that "plays by his own rules". The force keeps suspending him when he crosses the line but he keeps coming back and then cracks a big case.
-JiriHrdina
__________________
"The obfuscation is everywhere. The disinfo everywhere. My head spins trying to make any sense of it all." - Jiggy_12. Me too, man, me too. Musth – mostly misunderstood.
The Following User Says Thank You to musth For This Useful Post:
The data centers use an exorbitant amount of water in their cooling systems. AI art, videos, memes are generally worse on your brain than a direct hit from a baseball bat but it's just a waste of water too.
Tell me you're old without telling me you're old. Those first one didnt even include multiple teams, and the 2nd was just a made up Cup that happened once.
It's 02,10,this,14, and then everything else.
Tell me you weren't there and haven't a clue what they were about, without telling me you weren't there.
The Following User Says Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
A guy like Fleury who many thought shouldn't be there due to his substance abuse issues in the 2-3 years leading up to that tournament.
Kariya getting some redemption after missing 98.
Sakic trying to take claim as the best player in the world.
Young guys like Iginla and Gagne surprising to make the team.
CP tends to skew a little older so I absolutely am surprised to see anyone say that 2002 isn’t a top three moment. With the only possible arguments to surpass it being 1972 and 1987. And don’t get me wrong I have a lot of love for 2010. To me it currently sits for behind those three hockey games.
I would also add Yzerman to your list of storylines. He’s often overlooked because of Lemieux and the Sakic connection with Iginla. But Stevie Y had a monster tournament on one leg.
I was watching a little bit of that four nations documentary on CBC. I was actually kind of interested until about 10 minutes in one of the pundits they were interviewing said that four nations was the fourth most important hockey game in Canadian history after 1972, 1987, 2010.
After he said something so monumentally idiotic I turned the channel. If they’re going to interview people who don’t know anything about hockey then I have no interest in watching. It’s not like he was young either the guy was for sure in his 40s.
With the 50 year drought, 96 collapse, 98 failure, 2002 felt like our legitimacy as a hockey power was in question and on the verge of proving over.
Last edited by Cecil Terwilliger; 02-20-2026 at 07:46 PM.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Cecil Terwilliger For This Useful Post:
I think any of these tourneys that don't have Russia have to rank below the ones that do. It's not true best on best when they aren't there.
Can't help but wonder how Russia would have done in this tournament. A top line of Kaprizov-Malkin-Kucherov would have been something to behold. And with Sorokin or Shesterkin in net, they'd be a dangerous team to play against.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperMatt18
So many stories in 2002 too.
Gretzky as the GM
Lemieux returning from his battles to play.
A guy like Fleury who many thought shouldn't be there due to his substance abuse issues in the 2-3 years leading up to that tournament.
Kariya getting some redemption after missing 98.
Sakic trying to take claim as the best player in the world.
Young guys like Iginla and Gagne surprising to make the team.
2002 was awesome, but to me 2010 just barely edges it out because of home ice, and the fact that we took Russia behind the barn in the quarters.
Suggesting that there's "no argument" to be made for 2010 over 2002, is silly.
In 1981 Canada lost to the USSR in the in the final 8-1. In 1984 in the prelims they lost pretty convincingly to the USSR, and were down in the 3rd in the semis 2-1. Tied it up, then OT. An easy win in the Final vs the Swedes but the semis vs the Russians was a massive deal.
Saddledome wasn’t that wild again until a few moments in 1989. Then 2004 moments. Mid 2010s playoff chase and Anaheim game. Then of course the Game 7 Dallas OT winner by JG.
Tell me you weren't there and haven't a clue what they were about, without telling me you weren't there.
Yeah, and it's all about as relevant as a 50 year old hockey series could or should be.
- '02 on US ice after choking hard in '98. (Also Iggy coming out show)
- '10 on home soil with US seeking revenge. Again after a choking in '06 (Again, Iggy is lord)
- '26 stopping the US from winning gold, especially against Canada directly, is basically as political imperative as any sport event has ever been for Canada. You can argue Cold War, but that was a) not even Canada's thing, and b) arguably not as tumultuous as our current state.
- I do agree that no Russia is a big hole in the competition of the tournament. Would have made the semis much less interesting.
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach
Try to find someone not a rabid hockey fan born after 1980 (most of the population) that knows what any hockey tournament other than the Olympics is.
I'm a rabid hockey fan and I couldn't care less about those things outside of the 87 team probably having the best jersey ever.
Then you are just being willfully ignorant in regards to the original question.
72.
This one was the mot important series/win for Canada for aa myriad of reasons.
1) The geo-political climate of the time is something I hope is never repeated nor forgotten in our history though im aware it already has/is. I understand if you weren't there for it, you would have no idea but believe me, you should learn about it.
The cold war had its peaks and valleys and this was a time when tensions were being tested. The US had ramped up their involvement in Vietnam as had the Soviets (albeit by proxy). Canada and the US were seen by the USSR as very much the same thing. Globally there was anti-communism sentiment growing every where after the Soviets had invaded Czechoslovakia just a few years prior.
The SALT treaty had just been agreed too a couple months prior to the tourney (and after years of negotiations) which was on the mind of every citizen in the free world and dominated news cycles for months.
The Summit series really did come to represent good vs evil, us vs them, either with us or against us type stuff etc.
Though it was only 2 nations on the ice, it was multiple entities and belief systems represented....literally world wide.
2) This was the first time ever that Canada had a chance to play best on best with NHL players internationally. We had no clue how we fared against other countries because we had never been able to play the game that way. It was a completely foreign concept.
TBH Canada was pretty damn arrogant about it too. Maybe it was mostly media driven at the time but the prevailing attitude was the great Canadian style of hockey would wipe the Soviets out in all 8 contests. It was anything but as we all know in hindsight.
87
This one was different in that it was becoming clearer that the whole Iron curtain was starting to crumble. though the Berlin wall did not come down for another 2 years, the process was well underway. Again though this was Soviet "might" and pride on the line.
This was also the single greatest team Canada had or has ever assembled, and the Soviets also claim the same. Its hard to argue.
As for "made up" cup...ok. I will counter that with EVERY single tournament in the history of sports was "made up". Including the Olympics.
Things are needed to be created/made up before they exist.
This tourney was best on best with every single player absolutely striving to be the best...because it was an opportunity to do so that they would have no other way to achieve.
It also produced (and i will go to the grave with this) the best hockey ever played by professional hockey players.
The Sochi team was the most dominant team defensively ever put together anywhere but the 87 team was the best Canadian team.
Sorry for the rant but i believe its imperative to remember those things as they had a massive bearing on what shaped Hockey Canada and what we see to this very day.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to transplant99 For This Useful Post:
^^^ I do know about it. I'm a student of history and geo politics. A close relative played in the NHL at the time of the 87 series. I know all the lore.
I just think more current things are more relevant to today. I would argue every single point about the USSR and '72 is no more or less tumultuous than the current US president threatening to annex our country (and others) while they actively try to get one of our provinces to separate, and their whole system is being run by a bunch of pedo's and corrupt fools, and they intern and murder their own citizens. And it's all way more relevant because, you know, it's actually happening. And while you may have been afraid of USSR and communism, it ultimately didn't amount to anything but hurting the people within it.
__________________
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Coach For This Useful Post:
Not that I don't think 87 was a great team or 02 or 10 but 76 might be the most impressive roster Canada ever produced. 17 players made the hall of fame including Bobby Orr, Guy Lafleur, Lanny McDonald, Dion, Esposito, Bobby Hull, Bobby Clarke, Potvin, Robinson just to name a few.
Not that I don't think 87 was a great team or 02 or 10 but 76 might be the most impressive roster Canada ever produced. 17 players made the hall of fame including Bobby Orr, Guy Lafleur, Lanny McDonald, Dion, Esposito, Bobby Hull, Bobby Clarke, Potvin, Robinson just to name a few.
76 was an amazing team for sure. I was at the game in Toronto when Canada rolled the Swedes, 6-0 if memory serves
The Following User Says Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
The 87 Canada Cup arguably featured both the Soviet Union and Canada at a pretty significant peak in both Countries hockey history. Gretzky and Lemieux vs the KLM line with all around their primes was fantastic.
I don’t think 87 had as much cultural relevance as 72 or 2002. But it’s remembered for the quality of play. The Canadian and Soviet rosters were chock full of hall of famers who all consider is the best hockey they ever took part in.
And since it was before the wall came down, the CAN vs SOV three-game final was two systems pitted against each other. It was fascinating watching a whole roster of players who had never played in a game in the NHL but were a match for the very best the NHL had to offer.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
The Following User Says Thank You to CliffFletcher For This Useful Post:
