KoZed Posted September 28, 2008 Share Posted September 28, 2008 I am shocked at the exclusion of Game 2 of the 93 finals and Game 7 vs the Whalers in 86. The Heritage Classic? Really? Booooring IMO Game 2 of the 93 playoffs is on par with the too many men game. But Game 7 vs Whalers in 86 isnt as good as Game 3 vs NYR in 86. Too bad they dont have older games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wamsley01 Posted September 28, 2008 Share Posted September 28, 2008 IMO Game 2 of the 93 playoffs is on par with the too many men game. But Game 7 vs Whalers in 86 isnt as good as Game 3 vs NYR in 86. Too bad they dont have older games. I agree, but that wasn't on the list for voters. I cannot believe that people voted for Game 5 in 1993 and not Game 2. Game 2 changed the whole series around and had all the drama of the "To many men" game. If they went down 2-0 going back to LA that would have almost been the end of them. Within 25 minutes (intermission, 2 minutes of game play) the series was tied and the Habs had new life. Shocking omission Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helmethead Posted September 29, 2008 Share Posted September 29, 2008 Seems to me like they really @#$%# this up. Was this an online vote? Cause if it was, then it makes sense. Reason being that most of the voters would fall in the 10-20 and 20-35 age demographic and most of those within the 10-20 age group would choose the "Heritage Classic" over game 2 of the 93' Finals or Game 7 of the Habs-Whalers 86' playoffs. I was gonna buy the set. Now I think I'm just gonna download it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quebecois Posted September 29, 2008 Share Posted September 29, 2008 Ugh how did they leave off game 2...too me that game along with the too many men game are the most exciting games in Habs history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted September 29, 2008 Share Posted September 29, 2008 Seems to me like they really @#$%# this up. Was this an online vote? Cause if it was, then it makes sense. Reason being that most of the voters would fall in the 10-20 and 20-35 age demographic and most of those within the 10-20 age group would choose the "Heritage Classic" over game 2 of the 93' Finals or Game 7 of the Habs-Whalers 86' playoffs. I was gonna buy the set. Now I think I'm just gonna download it... Yeah on the Canadiens web site. The poll was up for at least a month possibly more., Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helmethead Posted September 29, 2008 Share Posted September 29, 2008 (edited) Yeah on the Canadiens web site. The poll was up for at least a month possibly more., They should have done their research before they trusted the viewers of canadiens.com to decide which games would be on the DVD set. That was a rookie mistake by the Habs Marketing Dept. If anything, they should have opened the voting to other sites; preferably ones with more knowledgable participants.... Edited September 29, 2008 by Helmethead Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted September 29, 2008 Share Posted September 29, 2008 Disgraceful stuff. Game 2 of the 1993 Finals is one of the most extraordinary games in NHL history, not just the Habs. Like I say, if it had been Toronto doing it, that game would be part of the mythology of the sport. Instead it's just something cherished by a single generation of Habs' fans - guys like me who are old enough to remember it vividly; older fans are too focused on the glory days, and young fans appear to be totally ignorant (judging from the inclusion of the heritage classic). Meanwhile non-habs fans just vaguely remember a "mediocre team with a great goalie" that somehow lucked its way to victory. This compliation misses a key opportunity to correct a ridiculous oversight in the collective memory of hockey fans and restore Game 2 to its rightful place in hockey history. Indeed, game 5 against the Kings in 1993 was a terrible bore of a hockey game and I'd rather leave THAT off than game 2. But of course the 'Heritage Classic' is the real joke of an inclusion on this. I don't really get the 1977 inclusion either; I guess you had to have something to represent The Greatest Season in NHL History, but there's something a bit random in picking *that* Cup as opposed to others from the dynasty years. Indeed, the 1976 Cup against Philly was of much greater historic significance, ending the Broadstreet Bullies' reign of terror and putting the goon years of hockey behind us (even though the American media kept pretending that hockey was a goon sport for the next 30 years). But that's niggling. The absence of Game 2, 1993, is a glaring, monumental and completely inexcusable omission that devalues the entire collection. F*ck them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsfan Posted September 29, 2008 Share Posted September 29, 2008 (edited) IMO Game 2 of the 93 playoffs is on par with the too many men game. But Game 7 vs Whalers in 86 isnt as good as Game 3 vs NYR in 86. Agreed. That game 3 vs the Rangers in 86 was HUGE. I can just imagine a 20 year old Roy stopping everything the Rangers had to shoot at him! A 50+ save evening. On top of that, Roy had to deal with the rabid Rangers fans chanting his name throughout the game...trying desperately to get Roy off of his game! Had they known what kind of competitor Roy was, they wouldn't even have bothered, cause they would have known that they couldn't do anything to get him off his game! IF it were up to me, I'd replace the Heritage classic game(which kinda sucked) with Game 3 of the COnference finals in 86 vs the Rangers. I'd also replace game 5 of the 93 finals with either game 2 or maybe even game 4 (where Roy gave that infamous wink to Sandstrom). I would also seriously think about putting in a game of the 71' playoffs. Apparently Dryden was simply incredible that year. Had it not been for his heroics, we would never have won that cup! Edited September 29, 2008 by Habsfan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoZed Posted September 29, 2008 Share Posted September 29, 2008 Disgraceful stuff. Game 2 of the 1993 Finals is one of the most extraordinary games in NHL history, not just the Habs. Like I say, if it had been Toronto doing it, that game would be part of the mythology of the sport. Instead it's just something cherished by a single generation of Habs' fans - guys like me who are old enough to remember it vividly; older fans are too focused on the glory days, and young fans appear to be totally ignorant (judging from the inclusion of the heritage classic). Meanwhile non-habs fans just vaguely remember a "mediocre team with a great goalie" that somehow lucked its way to victory. This compliation misses a key opportunity to correct a ridiculous oversight in the collective memory of hockey fans and restore Game 2 to its rightful place in hockey history. Indeed, game 5 against the Kings in 1993 was a terrible bore of a hockey game and I'd rather leave THAT off than game 2. What also goes overlooked in that Game 2 was that if McSorley's stick was legal, it's the Habs that would have wound up with a penalty. It was a pretty big gamble for Demers that late in the game trailing 2-1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsfan Posted September 29, 2008 Share Posted September 29, 2008 (edited) It was a pretty big gamble for Demers that late in the game trailing 2-1. That's the best part. Demers has said often enough on RDS that he KNEW that the stick was illegal. One of the Habs' trainers had picked up a few broken McSorley sticks after an L.A. practise at the Forum. The Habs knew he was using illegal sticks before the series even started! They just decided to wait for the right opportunity to make the call! Edited September 29, 2008 by Habsfan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mont Royale Posted September 29, 2008 Share Posted September 29, 2008 The absence of Game 2, 1993, is a glaring, monumental and completely inexcusable omission that devalues the entire collection. F*ck them. I agree, it should be on there... but c'mon. Whether we agree with them or not, all the games selected have some sort of historical or nostalgic significance. I'm still just pleased to death that this collection is being put together at all. It will still be on my must-buy list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazy26 Posted September 29, 2008 Share Posted September 29, 2008 I agree, it should be on there... but c'mon. Whether we agree with them or not, all the games selected have some sort of historical or nostalgic significance. I'm still just pleased to death that this collection is being put together at all. It will still be on my must-buy list. You're exactly right.... I guess we're all just really picky. I'm sure I'll play these DVDs until they don't work anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wamsley01 Posted September 29, 2008 Share Posted September 29, 2008 I agree, it should be on there... but c'mon. Whether we agree with them or not, all the games selected have some sort of historical or nostalgic significance. I'm still just pleased to death that this collection is being put together at all. It will still be on my must-buy list. The Heritage classic? Really? Why because it was played outdoors? 10 greatest games in the history of the Canadiens and it has signifigance because they played it outside and Theo wore a toque? I LOVE ESPN Classic. I LOVE when the NHL network shows retro games. I will sit down and watch Calgary/St. Louis in 1986 if the game had A MOMENT. I will watch Pittsburgh/Chicago to see Jagr go through the whole team to tie Game one etc etc. I have seen every one of those games on that DVD before except for the 1960 game on those channels or live. I have the Heritage classic on burned DVD and have never ONCE considered rewatching it. Not once. It ranks LAST on the rewatchability of all of those games. Number one? Game 2 of the 1993 Stanley Cup Finals. Still magic after watching it 100 times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsfan Posted September 29, 2008 Share Posted September 29, 2008 Number one? Game 2 of the 1993 Stanley Cup Finals. Still magic after watching it 100 times. You consider it better than game 7 vs the Whalers in 86' or Game 3 vs the Rangers again in 86'? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mont Royale Posted September 29, 2008 Share Posted September 29, 2008 The Heritage classic? Really? Why because it was played outdoors? 10 greatest games in the history of the Canadiens and it has signifigance because they played it outside and Theo wore a toque? Well, yes. It was the first outdoor game in... well, I have no idea. It seems less significant now because they're doing it every year, but it was a novelty back then. I agree it should be off, and '93 game 2 should be on. But, I understand that the voting was done by fans who are, in general, much more casual than those found here, and the novelty effect won out, apparently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted September 29, 2008 Share Posted September 29, 2008 As an event, the Heritage Classic is pretty significant. The game itself, not so much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wamsley01 Posted September 29, 2008 Share Posted September 29, 2008 (edited) You consider it better than game 7 vs the Whalers in 86' or Game 3 vs the Rangers again in 86'? Game 2 in 1993 is the most exciting Canadiens game I have ever seen. Game 7 vs the Whalers was an exciting finish and provides a great clip with Lemieux roofing the OT winner over Liut's shoulder. It had the do or die element to it but the game was played by two defensive minded teams who did not give up many scoring opportunities. It was a defensive struggle and a 1-0 snorefest until Babych tied it with 4 minutes to go. The finish alone makes it a classic. I have had Game 3 vs the Rangers on tape for 15 years and although it was an exciting game and Roy was unbelievable in the OT if the Habs had lost the game they would still have been leading the series 2-1. It lacked the urgency that the other two did. But because it was Roy's coming out party it has signifigance. The McSorley game had it all. It had the Canadiens badly outplaying the Kings only to be denied by Kelly Hrudey time and time again, it was essentially a must win game (a loss would have put them down 2-0 heading on the road), the Habs trailed with under two to go and Demers adds to the tension by putting the season on the line with an illegal stick measurement. After winning the measurement he pulls Roy. The move was risky and put the fear of god in every Canadiens fan watching the game. Not only do they tie the game, Desjardin wins it early in OT and saves the series. The joy of going from certain defeat to renewed life was probably the most exhilirating moment I have witnessed as a habs fan. For it not to be on the disc is insane. I agree with the Cucumber, if that game involved the 1993 Leafs it would be a highlight on the intro for every HNIC. The heritage classic is and was a gimmick to make money with little historical signifigance, especially now that they are making it a yearly cash cow. It was fun to watch at the time, but had zero rewatchability. Edited September 29, 2008 by Wamsley01 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted September 30, 2008 Share Posted September 30, 2008 (edited) Hear hear, Mr. Wamsley! Maybe I'm overreacting...but if a Tragically Hip's Greatest Hits collection came out and didn't include "New Orleans is Sinking" you'd feel pretty peeved...especially if you had no other way of accessing the song. I'm sorry, the omission of what MUST be one of the three or four single most exciting games in Habs' history (at least, in living memory) is just garbage, plain and simple. (By the way, I will always cherish Demers for the balls he showed in that game. I was there, and I was screaming and swearing at him from standing room in the agonizing moments when we waited to see if we'd get a penalty on the stick call...and then I was screaming and swearing at him NOT to pull Roy... ...never have I been so glad to be proven wrong in my life!) Edited September 30, 2008 by The Chicoutimi Cucumber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wamsley01 Posted September 30, 2008 Share Posted September 30, 2008 Hear hear, Mr. Wamsley! Maybe I'm overreacting...but if a Tragically Hip's Greatest Hits collection came out and didn't include "New Orleans is Sinking" you'd feel pretty peeved...especially if you had no other way of accessing the song. I'm sorry, the omission of what MUST be one of the three or four single most exciting games in Habs' history (at least, in living memory) is just garbage, plain and simple. (By the way, I will always cherish Demers for the balls he showed in that game. I was there, and I was screaming and swearing at him from standing room in the agonizing moments when we waited to see if we'd get a penalty on the stick call...and then I was screaming and swearing at him NOT to pull Roy... ...never have I been so glad to be proven wrong in my life!) It was a mistake to put it in the hands of fans. Because of the internet voting they did not reach all the fan base, but they certainly reached the younger generation of fan base who have little to no knowledge of the history of the franchise. Seeing as the whole point of this is a celebration of the 100 years it was a poor decision. Oh well, hopefullly in time they fix the oversight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMPL Posted September 30, 2008 Share Posted September 30, 2008 (edited) If they wanted the fans to vote, they should've mailed season tix holders a ballot. The Minnesota Twins did this for something similar Edited September 30, 2008 by MMPL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCHabnut Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 Agreed. That game 3 vs the Rangers in 86 was HUGE. I can just imagine a 20 year old Roy stopping everything the Rangers had to shoot at him! A 50+ save evening. On top of that, Roy had to deal with the rabid Rangers fans chanting his name throughout the game...trying desperately to get Roy off of his game! Had they known what kind of competitor Roy was, they wouldn't even have bothered, cause they would have known that they couldn't do anything to get him off his game! IF it were up to me, I'd replace the Heritage classic game(which kinda sucked) with Game 3 of the COnference finals in 86 vs the Rangers. I'd also replace game 5 of the 93 finals with either game 2 or maybe even game 4 (where Roy gave that infamous wink to Sandstrom). I would also seriously think about putting in a game of the 71' playoffs. Apparently Dryden was simply incredible that year. Had it not been for his heroics, we would never have won that cup! Ya that was an awesome game. Then when they got back to the Forum, they rolled ROOOOO.....AAAAAAHHH on the screen, like saying Ah that's nice, Roy's back there, we'll be OK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazy26 Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 Has anyone been able to find this in stores anywhere? I haven't had any success. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobRock Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 Has anyone been able to find this in stores anywhere? I haven't had any success. I picked it up at CD Plus yesterday, and I didn't think it was coming out until the end of the month. There is one glaring short-coming in the set. There's no alternate commentary for any of the games. I, for one, would have really liked to be able to watch the New Year's Eve game and hear a player or two talk about the game. Dick Irvin does a little intro on each disc. I really hate to say it, but this isn't nearly as well done as it could have been. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazy26 Posted November 7, 2008 Share Posted November 7, 2008 $42.99 at Best Buy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Picked it up for 41.99 on Amazon. I got it as a gift for my Dad, but I really wanna watch them and I don't know if I can wait for his August birthday or even Father's Day. Would it be too weird to give a Dad something on Valentine's Day? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.