Thread: OT: Stanley Cup Losers?
View Single Post
Old
07-20-2012, 10:41 AM
  #14
cheswick
Non-registered User
 
cheswick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Peg City
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,694
vCash: 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grind View Post
DON"T tell THAT to leafs fans, it's the greatest team that ever was!

What I don't get is how fans of the leafs who are younger then myself think they're great. They've been garbage for the majority of my lifespan.

Anyways I think it's the parity caused by the cap. Though it is suprising to see how teams such as boston and pittsburg fell off so dramatically (though it's important to note, Pittsburg was in the cup final the year prior to winning, which in my mind would put them on par/higher in competiveness then the Red wings).

Chicago imploded because of the cap in a big way. As for boston, i just don't know, it was essentially the exact same team last year and they just couldn't get anything done.

Personally i like the parity, and though it's nice to see "contenders" push for a while (ex: pitssburgh and detroit had been threats to win every year, though i wouldn't say as much for detroit now, pittsburgh could still challenge year in year out), i definitly prefer them "being in the mix" and not winning, then just winning every years.

All that does is cause a huge swell of half-fans to the team (detroit and pittsburgh most recently) and make every other fan hate the team even more.
Personally preferred the old way where there was generational parity vs yearly parity. There were greay Islanders teams then ehy dropped off to be replaced by great Oilers teams that dropepd off then great Pittsburg teams that dropped off. There was still parity its just lasted longer. Now its every year a team can win it then the next season have to dismantle cause of cap reasons.

I realize that the economics of the game from the 90's on changed dramatically and this generational parity probably eclipsed the reach of smaller market teams so something had to be done. But personally I'd rather had dynasty teams and really bad teams every year that change slowly morph vs any year any team can win it and all the teams are so close to each other.

I'm probably in the minority there though.

cheswick is offline   Reply With Quote