roy_133 Posted October 12, 2009 Report Share Posted October 12, 2009 http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=294546 Discuss... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 12, 2009 Report Share Posted October 12, 2009 http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=294546 Discuss... Being familiar with the Ballard years i would have to say,,,,,,doesnt surprise me. I do get a kick out of reading the comments on stories like this. One in particular got my attention. I'll quote part of it... """His team may have sucked...but he went out on top..DYING AS THE OWNER OF THE MOST POWERFULL & RECOGNIZED HOCKEY TEAM ON THE PLANET""" He's wrong on 1 count and correct on the 2nd 1... He went out on the bottom. He was a convicted criminal and his family and team were in turmoil. He was loathed by almost every fan that ever wore a Leaf jersey not to mention many a player. 2...They were the most recognized hockey team on the planet at that time,,,,, not because of their success on the ice, but rather their employees antics off the ice,,, with little boys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeepNYR Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 If that had happen, I don't know if the NHL would still be in Edmonton. The Oilers is the only WHA addition not to move to another city. And I think there are 5 very good reasons why that did not happen. After Pocklington the Oilers ownership had been questionable for some time. And when the league resumed in 2005, the Oilers had 28 owners, basically having more owners than players. But the league kept doing whatever it can to keep them in Edmonton. I really think the winning tradition had something to do with it. Deep down, I think had the Nordiques won the Cup in either 1986-the year they won the Adams Division-or won in 1995 with Foresberg and Sakic, the Nordiques would still be around. Same goes with the Jets and Whalers, had they won a Cup, things would be much different. That said, the Maple Leafs would not only be the team of the 1980's, but the team of the 1990's as well. They would have been able to keep Gretzky and Messier. By 1991 and 1992, a fully intact Maple Leaf team would have been able to defeat the North Stars and the Blackhawks in the Campbell Conference Finals, and possibly denying Mario Lemieux a ring. This would mean Gretzky would never have been a King. And Mess would never have been a Ranger, thus the Rangers would never have won the 1994 Cup. The Rangers would still have the 1940 drought, making this year the 70th season without a Cup. Given that there were a number of former Oilers on the 1993 Kings-like Kurri and McSorely- we could have had a Habs' vs. Leafs finals. And there were a number of former Oilers on the 1994 Rangers, so we could have had a Leafs vs. Canucks final the next year. Back to back All Canada finals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocket-1 Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 I say bull and more bull. Heres what i think about that: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.