Fansided

Montreal Canadiens: The True Hockey Dynasty

By Lissa Albert |
2 of 2
Next

Apr 17, 2015; Montreal, Quebec, CAN; General view of the ice and the jumbotron before the game two of Montreal Canadiens against Ottawa Senators of the first round of the 2015 Stanley Cup Playoffs at Bell Centre. Mandatory Credit: Jean-Yves Ahern-USA TODAY Sports

Montreal Canadiens: The True Hockey Dynasty

Montreal Canadiens fans know that our team has always been referred to as a dynasty. However, after the Stanley Cup was won by the Chicago Blackhawks, NHL commissioner Gary Bettman proclaimed, “I’d say you have a dynasty,” and the topic became a hot-button issue.

Well, Bettman’s reasoning was that the Hawks have now won the Cup 3 times in 6 years. And yes, that is truly a fantastic achievement, but does it really make the team a dynasty?

According to one writer, “The original measurement of an NHL dynasty was winning three consecutive championships.” He goes on, listing various teams who are considered to be dynasties.

The Toronto Maple Leafs (yes, those Maple Leafs) from the 40s, becoming the first NHL team to win 3 Cups in a row (1947, 1948, 1949). The New York Islanders (4 consecutive Cups: 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983) and even the Edmonton Oilers who did not win consecutive Cups but who won 5 times in 8 years, putting them in the “dynasty” column according to that writer.

But let’s look at the Montreal Canadiens. Here is a list of their consecutive wins:

1950s: the Habs won the Cup in 1955-56, 1956-57, 1957-58, 1958-59, 1959-60.

1970s: consecutive wins happened in 1975-76, 1976-77, 1977-78, 1978-79.

Those, however, are only the consecutive Cups. Visit the Bell Centre in Montreal – those 24 banners crowding the rafters are from Stanley Cup championships.

The Habs have won 24 Stanley Cups in their 105-year history, the most of any team – past or present. They are the longest-operating team in the league. The Canadiens predate the founding of the NHL (which was founded in 1917, 8 years after the Canadiens were founded).

Henri Richard – who played with the team from 1955-1975 – holds the NHL record for most Cups won by a single player.

In 105 years, there are surely more statistics to boast by a single team than by any other team in the NHL.

So yes, the Montreal Canadiens would have to be first on a list of hockey dynasties, if such a list existed (it probably does, though it is a highly subjective assessment).

There are many who agree with Bettman’s proclamation, not the least of whom are Chicago fans.

But are there detractors? Yes, there are.

(Continued next page)

Oct 16, 2014; Montreal, Quebec, CAN; Canadiens former goalie Ken Dryden brings the torch before the game between the Boston Bruins and the Montreal Canadiens at the Bell Centre. Mandatory Credit: Eric Bolte-USA TODAY Sports

Some analysts are not buying the “Chicago Dynasty” proclamation.

Stephen L. Carter – a political analyst – scoffed at the new coronation, cautioning against overusing the word when it isn’t warranted.

…consider sports, where any team that wins a championship more than once or twice within a decade has sportswriters talking about dynasty. I’m old enough to remember how, after Villanova defeated defending NCAA basketball champion Georgetown in the title game in 1985, an announcer proclaimed “There will be no dynasty” — as if winning two years in a row was enough to earn the word.

Carter suggests that invoking “dynasty” in such meager terms debases the word and what it represents. And that casual usage of it diminishes the lofty meaning of a true dynasty.

He does, however, name the Canadiens as a dynasty in the NHL, given the 24 Championship seasons, most in the league.

Greg Couch, of Bleacher Report, also scoffed – this time, at Gary Bettman making his proclamation:

Bettman has ulterior motives. He’s a commissioner setting up a conversation about his league for the offseason. He doesn’t get to decide. He isn’t the official arbiter.

He makes another strong statement with which I agree:

We might just need a new definition for dynasty.

In essence, it’s a lot more difficult to win a Stanley Cup in this NHL than it was just a few decades ago. There are 30 teams. Rules are in place that have cut down on the number of goals scored (a 50-goal scorer, for example, in today’s NHL is a huge deal, whereas it had first been accomplished by Maurice Richard in 1943-44, and it wasn’t accomplished again until another player for the Canadiens – Bernie “Boom Boom” Geffrion – did it in 1960-61).

The game has gotten faster, the players bigger; when the salary cap became reality (a result of the 2004 lockout), player acquisition and contracts entered the picture to make teams even more competitive.

Are the same standards that declared the Montreal Canadiens a dynasty still in place? Probably not, due to all the above reasons. They did start as a member of a group known as the “Original Six” – of course it was easier to win a Cup.

And yes, perhaps the definition (which varies from analyst to analyst) should be reworked.

But in my opinion – in agreement with Mr. Carter and Mr. Couch – it is premature to declare Chicago a dynasty.

Perhaps the better term might be as Jared Clinton wrote in a recent article. Referring to the wonderful graphic (which I highly recommend you visit) of every Cup-winning jersey published in the article, he says the following:

Of course, the image is littered with Montreal Canadiens jerseys and it’s cool to see the dynastic stretches of the New York Islanders and Edmonton Oilers.

“Dynastic stretch” is an excellent compromise.

And of course, being the Canadiens fan, writer, and unapologetic defender that I am, I will stand by my opinion that if there truly is an NHL dynasty, the Canadiens hold the title.

What are your thoughts?

More from A Winning Habit

Next
Home / Editorials