HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Bettman "Original 12"

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-11-2012, 12:54 PM
  #101
Breakingbad28
Registered User
 
Breakingbad28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Country: Vietnam
Posts: 586
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by edog37 View Post
no to Sabres/Canucks. It would have been CA Golden Seals & North Stars. I find it really funny that people object to this. Obviously all the entitlement O6 fan boys have their panties in a wad, but why shouldn't Second Six be given their due? The ones that remain are going to be hitting 50 in a few years & have certainly earned their due.....
well with this logic we should have the ottowa senators, quebec athletics and the montreal wanderers in the original 6

Breakingbad28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 12:59 PM
  #102
Doctor No
Mod Supervisor
Retired?
 
Doctor No's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 24,344
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TOML View Post
Really important title.

Just ask the California Golden Seals and the Minnesota North Stars.
I don't recall anyone stating that it was important. (Above and beyond the fact that hockey is ultimately a diversion).

If someone hadn't started a thread about it, I bet that 95% of the people participating here (myself included) wouldn't have even heard about it.

Doctor No is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 01:03 PM
  #103
WaveRaven
Registered User
 
WaveRaven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Winnerpeg
Posts: 608
vCash: 300
I did not know there can be more than 1 set or originals .... I have some Picaso's here for all of you that think there can be more than 1 set of orignals .... please pm me for pricing.

WaveRaven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 01:09 PM
  #104
Yog S'loth
Registered User
 
Yog S'loth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,407
vCash: 500
This is not a big deal at all.

I've always hated the "original six" tag, anyway. That's not very accurate either, now is it? Who cares how many teams there were before 90% of NHL fans were born?

You want original teams? Go Wanderers or go home.

Yog S'loth is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 01:11 PM
  #105
Sensfanman
Registered User
 
Sensfanman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,181
vCash: 500
Isn't the Original 6 false as well? If you look up the NHL history, it started in 1917 with the Montreal Canadiens, the Montreal Wanderers, the Toronto Arenas, and the Ottawa Senators. Around the Great Depression and the end of the War (aka 1942) we had the Original 6 which lasted until 1967. But the NHL did exist before that unless I'm mistaken and it, say, folded and restarted or something.

Sensfanman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 01:29 PM
  #106
LuckyDay
Registered User
 
LuckyDay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: The Uncanny Valley
Posts: 289
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
That wasn't exactly Bettman. That was the competition committee and the board.
Its first major proposal was by former Disney CEO Michael Eisner. This statement (and more) showed that Bettman's new owners didn't have much of a clue (or, apparently, were way ahead of their time).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Granlund2Pulkkinen View Post
... the significance of "the original six" is for 41 years there were only six teams in the league. By far the longest the NHL had ever gone without adding teams. Since then there has been expansion and retraction at a pretty rapid rate in comparison to 41 years.

Hence why "The Original 6" actually holds merit.
nope - people actually thought that these teams were around from the beginning. They longed for the days when there were no Americans playing and no American franchises and their team had a slight chance of winning.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Senshi View Post
I agree. Also I don't acknowledge any Stanley Cup Champion prior to the expansion in 1967–68. Calling yourself a champion in 6 team league seems ridiculous and embarrassing.

Hence the Montreal Canadiens only have 10 SC Trophies, the Detroit Red Wings have 4, Boston Bruins have 3, Chicago Blackhawks & NY Rangers both have 1 and the Toronto Maple Leafs have none.
this, but expansion shouldn't be the reason; its the draft. As long as the Habs had exclusive rights to all French Canadian players they had at least a 30+ per cent advantage over every team in the league because that was the talent they could draw from that the other five could not.

--

there's a big forget that people are missing here

Bettman may be mixing the team up with the St Louis Eagles but they were, in fact, the 15th team in the league - unless you consider them the same team as the original Ottawa Senators. In that case, they would be Original Six (Four) not 12.

--

I must admit though, I am more partial to the 16 team league before those ex-WHA franchises came in with their lousy play.

LuckyDay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 02:01 PM
  #107
Butch 19
King me
 
Butch 19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: L.A. suburb
Country: United States
Posts: 9,099
vCash: 500
MOD


Exactly. I didn't see the term original 6 until the late '90s / early 2000s - it is just a marketing ploy that, um, a certain 6 teams "thought was a good idea."

It's elitist and demeaning all at the same time. The NHL is the only professional sports league that actually "separates" a certain group of teams just because they're old.

Does the NFL or MLB do this? of course not, and for good reason. It's divisive (just read this thread to prove that)

And for Bettman using the term "original 12 teams" here, that's totally appropriate since he was addressing the issue of new Blues ownership. But I also bet there won't be any "original 12" t-shirts or hats made up - nor should they.

And for those that have original 6 gear, I assume you're a fan of 1 of those 6 teams. Why would you EVER wear a logo (no matter how small) of the opposition?? I couldn't do that.


Last edited by Fugu: 05-11-2012 at 10:41 PM. Reason: quotes deleted post
Butch 19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 03:24 PM
  #108
ArGarBarGar
Global Moderator
Defense Please
 
ArGarBarGar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 26,872
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Butch 19 View Post
It's elitist and demeaning all at the same time. The NHL is the only professional sports league that actually "separates" a certain group of teams just because they're old.
Explain how it is elitist and demaning.

Also, those original six franchises bring in a lot of bacon from the amount of history they have and the fanbase they have accumulated over the many years.

They aren't "better" teams than others. They are just a hotter draw than most other teams in the league. Not to mention the many rivalries within the original six that increase the allure. Why do you think the Wings/Avs rivalry took a nosedive as soon as the players from the beginning left and the Wings/Blackhawks rivalry jumped right back up once then Hawks became a cup contender again? Traditional rivalries founded on many years of head to head matchups.

ArGarBarGar is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 03:32 PM
  #109
CarvinSigX
Meh
 
CarvinSigX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Ill Side
Country: United States
Posts: 8,855
vCash: 500
Rivalries are rivalries. They don't go away because of a team not being able to compete or because they are old franchises. Cardinals and Cubs fans will always "hate" each other and it sure isn't because they're old teams.

CarvinSigX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 03:38 PM
  #110
Viqsi
carrying the flag
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 21,116
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sour Shoes View Post
oh hell yes!!!

i'm a pens fan. we're part of the original 12. that means 4 more fanbases (including ours) can act smug and entitled every time a hockey discussion takes place. hipsters will say our uniforms are at least in the top 10 due to tradition. its truly an honor to carry my fancard with a false sense of superiority. respect!
I envy you so much. It'll be another 30 years at least before I get to be a snotty ***** about my fandom.



__________________
Remember - when you're a hockey fan, it's not "reckless driving", it's "good forechecking".
"Viqsi, you are our sweet humanist..." --mt-svk on the CBJ boards

Thanks, Howson, for cleaning up MacLean's toxic waste. Welcome, Kekalainen; let's get good things built!
Viqsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 04:11 PM
  #111
uncleben85
My face is my mask.
 
uncleben85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Guelph, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,720
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhXcoyotes View Post
Are all of our teams a part of the "Origional 30"?
Winnipeg's not.
Anaheim's technically not.

uncleben85 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 06:22 PM
  #112
ArGarBarGar
Global Moderator
Defense Please
 
ArGarBarGar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 26,872
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarvinSigX View Post
Rivalries are rivalries. They don't go away because of a team not being able to compete or because they are old franchises. Cardinals and Cubs fans will always "hate" each other and it sure isn't because they're old teams.
Never said teams can't have rivalries if they aren't old.

ArGarBarGar is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 06:43 PM
  #113
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 15,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Holliday View Post
They aren't "better" teams than others. They are just a hotter draw than most other teams in the league. Not to mention the many rivalries within the original six that increase the allure. Why do you think the Wings/Avs rivalry took a nosedive as soon as the players from the beginning left and the Wings/Blackhawks rivalry jumped right back up once then Hawks became a cup contender again? Traditional rivalries founded on many years of head to head matchups.
Because Chicago is in the same division as Detroit, and because Chicago's return to relevance happened to coincide with a schedule shift that placed a much greater emphasis on division play.

Why isn't Toronto/Detroit or Toronto/Chicago any type of rivalry, and won't be even if the Leafs become a contender?

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 07:03 PM
  #114
themightyquinn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 489
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
Why isn't Toronto/Detroit or Toronto/Chicago any type of rivalry, and won't be even if the Leafs become a contender?
Toronto/Chicago I'll give you but Toronto/Detroit not a rivalry? You must be very young or not have been around hockey in the 80's. But then again I guess it's easy to dismiss an entire 60 years of history prior to Toronto moving to the Eastern Conference in the 90's when you're trying to get a false point across.

Apart from Montreal, Detroit has always been one of Toronto's greatest rivals. Montreal had Boston and Toronto had Detroit. Many older fans still consider Detroit to be Toronto's second rival (behind Montreal but ahead of Ottawa/Buffalo).

themightyquinn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 07:06 PM
  #115
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 15,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by themightyquinn View Post
Toronto/Chicago I'll give you but Toronto/Detroit not a rivalry? You must be very young or not have been around hockey in the 80's. But then again I guess it's easy to dismiss an entire 60 years of history prior to Toronto moving to the Eastern Conference in the 90's when you're trying to get a false point across.

Apart from Montreal, Detroit has always been one of Toronto's greatest rivals. Montreal had Boston and Toronto had Detroit. Many older fans still consider Detroit to be Toronto's second rival (behind Montreal but ahead of Ottawa/Buffalo).
Toronto was in the same division as both Detroit and Chicago during their Campbell/Western days. Trust me, I remember them..."How they bore us in the Norris", I believe, was the headline for those days.

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 08:35 PM
  #116
The Note
Bullies
 
The Note's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: STL
Country: United States
Posts: 2,593
vCash: 500
I'm just glad someone bought the team

The Note is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 09:41 PM
  #117
ArGarBarGar
Global Moderator
Defense Please
 
ArGarBarGar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 26,872
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
Because Chicago is in the same division as Detroit, and because Chicago's return to relevance happened to coincide with a schedule shift that placed a much greater emphasis on division play.

Why isn't Toronto/Detroit or Toronto/Chicago any type of rivalry, and won't be even if the Leafs become a contender?
Does every original six team have to be involved in a rivalry with every other original six team for my point to be correct? Because not once did I say that.

ArGarBarGar is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 10:02 PM
  #118
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 15,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Holliday View Post
Does every original six team have to be involved in a rivalry with every other original six team for my point to be correct? Because not once did I say that.
Your exact phrase was:

"Not to mention the many rivalries within the original six that increase the allure. Why do you think the Wings/Avs rivalry took a nosedive as soon as the players from the beginning left and the Wings/Blackhawks rivalry jumped right back up once then Hawks became a cup contender again? Traditional rivalries founded on many years of head to head matchups."

My point is that Toronto/Detroit would make more sense, considering that Chicago and Detroit were completely separated for 11 years (1970-71 to 1980-81); Detroit was in either the same division or same conference as Toronto during that entire span. When Detroit and Chicago ended up reuniting in the re-formed Norris, Toronto came along at the same time. That remained up through 1998-99.

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 10:11 PM
  #119
ArGarBarGar
Global Moderator
Defense Please
 
ArGarBarGar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 26,872
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
Your exact phrase was:

"Not to mention the many rivalries within the original six that increase the allure. Why do you think the Wings/Avs rivalry took a nosedive as soon as the players from the beginning left and the Wings/Blackhawks rivalry jumped right back up once then Hawks became a cup contender again? Traditional rivalries founded on many years of head to head matchups."

My point is that Toronto/Detroit would make more sense, considering that Chicago and Detroit were completely separated for 11 years (1970-71 to 1980-81); Detroit was in either the same division or same conference as Toronto during that entire span. When Detroit and Chicago ended up reuniting in the re-formed Norris, Toronto came along at the same time. That remained up through 1998-99.
If only there was an event to showcase the two teams together for next season.

And I still don't think you are understanding the point of the whole "tradition helping rekindle rivalries" bit. The same division helps but the relationship between Detroit and Chicago is different than that of St. Louis, Nashville, or Columbus. And the point I'm trying to make is there is something to be had from the idea of "original six" that you really can't get from the other expansions. The perception of the brand between those teams is just different, which may be unfair to those teams who haven't had much time to establish a brand but that is just how it is.

ArGarBarGar is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 10:45 PM
  #120
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 29,949
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by themightyquinn View Post
Toronto/Chicago I'll give you but Toronto/Detroit not a rivalry? You must be very young or not have been around hockey in the 80's. But then again I guess it's easy to dismiss an entire 60 years of history prior to Toronto moving to the Eastern Conference in the 90's when you're trying to get a false point across.

Apart from Montreal, Detroit has always been one of Toronto's greatest rivals. Montreal had Boston and Toronto had Detroit. Many older fans still consider Detroit to be Toronto's second rival (behind Montreal but ahead of Ottawa/Buffalo).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Holliday View Post
If only there was an event to showcase the two teams together for next season.

At The Big House, no less.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 11:50 PM
  #121
Chungo
Registered User
 
Chungo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 811
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by loLZokAY View Post
http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/79...ght-new-owners



The frickin wut? Bettman, words can't even be equated right now. If you ever were to try and push an original 12... my god...
We aren't changing history, we're improving history.

Chungo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2012, 12:40 AM
  #122
FormerRedwingFan
Sarcastic User Name
 
FormerRedwingFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: MI
Posts: 1,411
vCash: 500
Original 6 thing is so overblown. Many NHL rivalries are also overblown. Guy is trying to help a city excited about their team's return to success. How is that being a bad commish?

FormerRedwingFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2012, 09:26 AM
  #123
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 22,300
vCash: 500
It's such a strange way to name it. How can it original 12 when there was already an original 6 before. Maybe he should give it another name like "The Big 12". Or "The second Generation" or whatever.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2012, 09:30 AM
  #124
Romang67
BitterSwede
 
Romang67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Maryland
Country: Sweden
Posts: 12,477
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chungo View Post
We aren't changing history, we're improving history.

Romang67 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2012, 09:47 AM
  #125
Legionnaire11
Registered User
 
Legionnaire11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hendersonville
Country: United States
Posts: 2,750
vCash: 500
Original 6 is funny anyway and the guys who cling to it don't have any context. That era did more to HURT the game of hockey than to help it. Norris practically "owned" 3 of the 6, and any time the group was present with a chance to expand (see: GROW) the game, they rejected it. Hockey could have cemented a foundation in other markets much earlier and have a more solid place in the sporting landscape if not for the O6 and their close-minded exclusivity.


Throw in the territorial draft rights and the fact that 4 of the 6 made it into the playoffs each season needing only two series to win the cup and pretty much all NHL history prior to '67 should be thrown out the window.

So Original 12 is totally legit when you consider that '67 was really the beginning of the modern NHL.

Legionnaire11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:02 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.