View Single Post
10-21-2004, 12:21 PM
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,139
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by NYIsles1
Not about giving crediting or diminishing anything. This was the competitive landscape of the league in that era. I do think the late 80's Flames could have won a cup out of the East, but prior to that absolutely not. In 1981 the league played a balanced schedule so Calgary listed in the Patrick Division played everyone the same four times. Aside from defeating Philadelphia in one playoff series in 1981 (and losing to Minnesota) for five years in the seventies Calgary did not get out of the opening round one time.

When expansion came in 1967 the Blues made three finals in a row and the final was such a mismatch the league had to go back to non-conference playoffs until 1981. During that time only one team from the West (Chicago) even played in a final.

Whether you care to admit it or not there was a huge disaprity.

When the playoff format changed to conference playoffs Calgary finally started winning some playoff series. But the bottom line was teams like Vancouver were marginal at best in that era and never would have had success playing as Eastern Conference seeds.

You want to give the Oilers credit that's fine, they were good enough to win a cup in either conference, but the road and quality of opponents to the finals after the conference playoffs were reinstated were far different for East and West. Would the Islanders in 84 or Philadelphia in 85 had enough to defeat Edmonton if they had Winnipeg, Vancouver and Calgary in the early rounds as opposed to Boston, Rangers, Montreal.

I think so. I have no doubt Edmonton would have had to go thru a harder grind to get into a final. No way they would have won five cups.
You can't conclusively say that. They may very well have won 5 cups.

KariyaIsGod* is offline