I've always been confused about the Flames captaincy during the late 80's.
I was too young to remember any of this, but I just figured Lanny was our captain til he retired. What's with the pee-wee hockey carousel of rotating captains? Why was it a thing on the Flames?
A group of us watched that game in Aeneas's walk-out basement. We would have been around 19 years old at the time. We rotated around between each other's homes based on which place seemed lucky at the time. There was a portable shrine of Flames merch that we brought with us to surround the TV.
When Smith "scored" I was too anxious to watch the rest of the game, believing the Oilers would surely score. I went out in the back yard (I think Aeneas did too) and we waited in agony for our other friends to finally tell us the Flames held on.
We piled in the back of a friend's pick-up truck, and headed downtown, waving Flames flags. Might have gone to the airport too. We ended up at a "gentleman's club" on 16th ave - was that Franky and Johnnys? What happened there, stays there.
And the Flames did the Habs a giant favor. I don't see any way they would have beat that Oilers team.
Also, will be forever envious of the two chaps you can see jumping out of the seat, one with jazz hands and one with the cowboy hat at the 5s mark.
I’ve been to Flames game up there in Northlands 5 times between 99 and 2006, and there is no better feeling in the world of walking out of there win a win, but that would’ve been a whole other level.
They likely still got causally/subtly “bumped into” or beer “accidentally” spilled on their jacket, or threatened assault in the bathrooms or concourse or outside waiting for a cab like most Flames fan did up there, especially in the leaner years.
The Following User Says Thank You to browna For This Useful Post:
And the Flames did the Habs a giant favor. I don't see any way they would have beat that Oilers team.
Well, the Habs had this rookie named Patrick Roy who basically carried his team to the Stanley Cup. He probably would've stonewalled the Oilers. My father and others were saying that Roy was the 2nd coming of Ken Dryden who carried his team to the Cup in 1971 as a rookie.
Well, the Habs had this rookie named Patrick Roy who basically carried his team to the Stanley Cup. He probably would've stonewalled the Oilers. My father and others were saying that Roy was the 2nd coming of Ken Dryden who carried his team to the Cup in 1971 as a rookie.
Roy was incroyable but still usually those elite squads (just in my gut feeling nothing else- obviously impossible to prove) typically have one upset in them- if the Oilers had made it on , I think they take the outmatched Habs
what bothered me more was living in Montreal in the later 80s reading the Habs writers (I'm looking at you Red Fisher- RIP) would look back at that series and say that the Flames were flukes to even be in the finals, totally over matched by the Habs who were the rightful Wales conference powerhouse- given that the Flames finished admittedly right ahead of them in the regular season, and were decimated by injuries in the finals I always found that to be a bit of a stretch
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to looooob For This Useful Post:
That '88-'89 team was the best the Habs had had since their late-'70s juggernauts. 115 points in the regular season is still one of the highest totals for a team that did not win the Stanley Cup. I can see why they thought that team was destined to win, even though in retrospect it's awfully myopic of them to ignore that the Flames were better by every statistical measure other than in net.
That '88-'89 team was the best the Habs had had since their late-'70s juggernauts. 115 points in the regular season is still one of the highest totals for a team that did not win the Stanley Cup. I can see why they thought that team was destined to win, even though in retrospect it's awfully myopic of them to ignore that the Flames were better by every statistical measure other than in net.
I’m referring to 86 by 88 they were saying that the 86 flames team had no business being in the same rink as the habs/ in 89 they thought their team was better than the flames but acknowledged it was close
Ah, yeah, the Habs were still competitive enough, and some Montrealers still delusional enough, that lots of people still believed every Stanley Cup championship was pretty much the Habs' to lose. I remember well into the '90s that prevailing opinion was that the Campbell/Western Conference was the weak sister to the Wales/Eastern (probably not a wrong assessment either...). Even now eastern reporters still tend to have a very myopic view of the state of the NHL.
I think the argument was that the Flames' record was flattered by dominating their crappy division (17-4-3 combined vs. the Jets/Canucks/Kings), and the Habs had a better (relative) record against the Campbell Conference (18-10-2; .633) than the Flames did (24-17-6; .575) even with the benefit of all those wins against the Jets/Canucks/Kings. (The Flames' 6-7-2 record against the Norris was worst in the league.) Half the Campbell Conference were easily the worst teams in the league that year—Jets had 59 points, Canucks had 59, Maple Leafs had 57, Kings had 54 and Red Wings had 40—and three of those bottom-feeders made the playoffs!
In '89 they had reason to believe they were better than the Flames, as the Habs did lead the regular season standings a good chunk of the year.
Roy was incroyable but still usually those elite squads (just in my gut feeling nothing else- obviously impossible to prove) typically have one upset in them- if the Oilers had made it on , I think they take the outmatched Habs
what bothered me more was living in Montreal in the later 80s reading the Habs writers (I'm looking at you Red Fisher- RIP) would look back at that series and say that the Flames were flukes to even be in the finals, totally over matched by the Habs who were the rightful Wales conference powerhouse- given that the Flames finished admittedly right ahead of them in the regular season, and were decimated by injuries in the finals I always found that to be a bit of a stretch
I agree with you on all your points except the bold part. I could be misunderstanding you, but, the 86 Habs weren't a conference powerhouse. Looking back at the standings and playoffs, it wasn't until 88 that the Habs were a strong team in the eastern conf.
Another 86 to 89 compare/contrast is that the Habs did the Flames a big favour by beating a rough and tough Flyers team.
except they didn't. The Habs didn't have to knock off a single team ahead of them in the standings until the Flames- the Rangers did most of the dirty work including the Flyers, and the Whale took out the Nords
I agree with you on all your points except the bold part. I could be misunderstanding you, but, the 86 Habs weren't a conference powerhouse. Looking back at the standings and playoffs, it wasn't until 88 that the Habs were a strong team in the eastern conf.
yeah, I was referring to their revisionist history - they were calling the Flames the fluke team, whereas at least the Flames slayed the mightiest of all dragons- the Habs were the 5th highest seed (I think, or 4th) in their conference in the playoffs but didn't have to upset anyone thanks to the Whalers (who they had a tough series of their own with) and the Rangers
while it was (obviously) a massive upset, the Flames for a few years were likely better than given credit. they were the 2nd highest scoring team in the NHL that year, this was the season though where they had the 11 game losing streak (don't get me wrong, losing streaks are part of your record) but that was sort of righted by the arrival of Vernon in net, and then the team made the major moves to acquire Tonelli and Mullen so there is alot of reason in retrospect to realize the playoff version of the club was likely quite a bit better than the 89 point regular season total would suggest
in the end many of the core elements of the cup team (MacInnis, Mullen, Vernon, Otto, Loob, Suter*, Macoun, Patterson as well as the support/veteran pieces Peplinski/Lanny/Hunter (better in 86 than they were in 89) were in place along with other very good players (Reinhart, Tonelli, Wilson, Lemelin, Riser)...they were a good team
And the Flames did the Habs a giant favor. I don't see any way they would have beat that Oilers team.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsawwassen
Another 86 to 89 compare/contrast is that the Habs did the Flames a big favour by beating a rough and tough Flyers team.
Quote:
Originally Posted by looooob
except they didn't. The Habs didn't have to knock off a single team ahead of them in the standings until the Flames- the Rangers did most of the dirty work including the Flyers, and the Whale took out the Nords
My mistake for not being clear about what I posted. Troutman posted that the 86 Flames did the Habs a big favour by beating the Oilers. My response about comparing/contrasting was the 89 Habs doing the favour by beating the Flyers. The Flyers were the underdog in that playoff year and gave the Habs everything they had.
