Montreal Canadiens: The True Hockey Dynasty

2 of 2

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

Home/Editorials