Guest Stogey24 Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 That's a good point The politics behind a Quebec City team scare me. Considering how much Geoff Molson already panders in terms of placing restrictive rules on who can be hired for certain positions, the presence of another French-based team makes it seem likely that those self-imposed rules will only increase, much to the detriment of the Canadiens. I, for one, don't want that to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 A very good point. I wish I could somehow ask Mr. Molson if this Policy will be softened in case a new team plays in Québec. Cuz with Quebecor involved and Peladeau around (Leader of the Parti Québécois), it's almost certain that they will apply the same Policy regarding french speaking staff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 If it helps, DON, all I can do is (self-importantly) quote myself: What's doubly worrisome is that Molson has already shown himself to be panicky and subject to fan/media influence on these issues - as when he threw Cunneyworth under the bus (and then quite possibly forcing Zoot to sign Briere). One francophone star in Quebec, and the Habs will be under almost unbearable amounts of pressure to match them. That way lies wasted picks on francophone busts, destructive trades for washed up Lecavaliers, etc. Be afraid. And I'll reiterate that a Nordiques team, no matter how terrible, will play us with ferocious intensity every time - meaning we will lose a disproportionate amount of games to then, because beating us will be their Stanley Cup, while beating them won't mean all that much to us at all. It's a no-win situation for the Habs. F**k the Quebec Nordiques. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 We do have a 3-2 record against them in the playoffs... dunno, looking for silver lining. Oh I got it. They are gonna be TRASH for at least their first five years and if they don't get to play in the Atlantic immediately, they'll be trash in the Western Conference's Central division and far away from us. Also, as I bring up every time: Cunnyworth was a terrible coach who never should have been behind the bench. He was also probably made coach to be a big distraction so Gauthier could save his job by blaming it on the coach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meller93 Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 If Toronto and Boston lost their NHL franchises I'd be happy. If the Habs won the Stanley Cup every year for the next 20 years, I'd be cheering just as loud in 2036 as I would be in 2016. It's all about the Cup. No worry, as long as Bettman has USA options like Vegas, QC aint getting a franchise. If Leafs and Bruins folded you would be pleased? Crazy talk! I gotta say I'm 100% with Don. Yes MOLG I'm all for the cup too, but it's because the cup is so damned hard to get. It's the rivalries and difficulty that make getting it so gratifying. Like you, I'll be just as big of a Habs fan in 2036, but personally, experiencing a tough Quebec rivalry would make it that much better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 We have enough rivals - more than any other team, I'd warrant. Forget it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 We have enough rivals - more than any other team, I'd warrant. Forget it. Montreal vs. Boston: Greatest rivalry in hockey, arguably greatest rivalry in North American sports Montreal vs. Toronto: Oldest Canadian hockey rivalry, teams split games regardless of quality Montreal vs. Ottawa: Young rivalry since Toronto can't make the playoffs Montreal vs. Tampa Bay: Temporary rivalry based on quality of competition in division I can't think of who else has four meaningful rivalries out there. And that's not including the fact that Montreal/New York and Montreal/Philadelphia games have always had this feeling of an elevated level of compete, especially since NY and Philly have our number in the playoffs. Add the Nordiques and that's five rivalries. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter your rivalries but that you're the best team. Chicago has had rivalries with the Red Wings, Predators and Wild but the difference is they win when it matters in those rivalries. If we were dominating our rivalries we wouldn't care so much. And I get some like the rivalries, but if the Habs went 82-0 and 16-0, would you be disappointed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meller93 Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 The only point I'm trying to make is that the fact that it's tough is why the result is so good. I'd take 16-0 yes, many many times, but believe it or not I think that after about 3 years of 16-0, you'd wish for a few losses. You'd wish for a challenge. Else it just becomes futile, you already know the result, what's the point in watching? That being said, the league is tough as it is and I'd agree Montreal has more rivals than most, or probably all teams. I definitely get not wanting another rival, but I've just never experienced the Nordiques so the Montreal-Nordiques thing interests me a lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meller93 Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Besides, Sweeney just S**T the Bruins-Habs rivalry down the toilet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Besides, Sweeney just S**T the Bruins-Habs rivalry down the toilet If Rask was an elite goalie against us like he is against everyone else I disagree but yeah, they shouldn't be much of a challenge for us. We better not let twits like Zac Rinaldo catch us off our game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 The only point I'm trying to make is that the fact that it's tough is why the result is so good. I'd take 16-0 yes, many many times, but believe it or not I think that after about 3 years of 16-0, you'd wish for a few losses. You'd wish for a challenge. Else it just becomes futile, you already know the result, what's the point in watching? That being said, the league is tough as it is and I'd agree Montreal has more rivals than most, or probably all teams. I definitely get not wanting another rival, but I've just never experienced the Nordiques so the Montreal-Nordiques thing interests me a lot. Nope can't agree. we know we won 4 straight cups 74-79. we won 229 games reg season vs 46 losses. the rest were ties. I always thought they blew about 30 games on ties over 4years. Imagine if they had of played the way they can in those 45 ties over the 4 years. There had to be 30 games they could win. What a record that would have been. No they can never win too much for me. I want them to destroy everybody all the time, but hey I am a spoiled Habs fan what can I say? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meller93 Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Nope can't agree. we know we won 4 straight cups 74-79. we won 229 games reg season vs 46 losses. the rest were ties. I always thought they blew about 30 games on ties over 4years. Imagine if they had of played the way they can in those 45 ties over the 4 years. There had to be 30 games they could win. What a record that would have been. No they can never win too much for me. I want them to destroy everybody all the time, but hey I am a spoiled Habs fan what can I say? Because a 82-0 record will never happen, they can never really win too much for me either. I'd take 72-10 because I know any given night they COULD lose (sorry mobile doesn't have italics). But I guess we just disagree on the never ever losing part lol, just a difference in philosophy I suppose Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 I'm of the '82 win' philosophy too. But that aside, it's already hard enough to win. Adding a team in Quebec makes it that much harder - and creates special challenges that affect us alone, because we have to go to war where other teams don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 I'm of the '82 win' philosophy too. But that aside, it's already hard enough to win. Adding a team in Quebec makes it that much harder - and creates special challenges that affect us alone, because we have to go to war where other teams don't. As much as I agree, as I said earlier, Chicago has similar pressure through rivalries and they still win Cups. Why? Because they win their rivalries. It's tougher when you split or lose them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 hahaha I think that I would prefer the players/coach/medias/fanbase to blame the injuries rather than "too-many-rivalries" !! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueKross Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 I'm of the '82 win' philosophy too. But that aside, it's already hard enough to win. Adding a team in Quebec makes it that much harder - and creates special challenges that affect us alone, because we have to go to war where other teams don't. Everybody hates the Yankees or loves them; that's just part of beating down on everybody so often. Montreal is the hockey version of the Yankees. Challenges make us stronger. Welcome Quebec City. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Everybody hates the Yankees or loves them; that's just part of beating down on everybody so often. Montreal is the hockey version of the Yankees. Challenges make us stronger. Welcome Quebec City. I'd rather welcome them to the basement of the NHL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 I'd rather welcome them to the basement of the NHL. UHH and where else would they go? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted June 1, 2016 Author Share Posted June 1, 2016 Three weeks from now is the NHL's Board of Governors meeting. At that time, it's expected that an official announcement will be made regarding expansion. The scuttlebutt today seems to be that Vegas is pretty much a done deal, the only question seems to be 2017-18 or 2018-19. On the other side, no one seems to have any sort of confidence about Quebec getting a team. They can expand by one - not only have they had an uneven number of teams before but there already is an uneven number of teams in each conference; if anything, this would get it closer to fair than it currently is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Three weeks from now is the NHL's Board of Governors meeting. At that time, it's expected that an official announcement will be made regarding expansion. The scuttlebutt today seems to be that Vegas is pretty much a done deal, the only question seems to be 2017-18 or 2018-19. On the other side, no one seems to have any sort of confidence about Quebec getting a team. They can expand by one - not only have they had an uneven number of teams before but there already is an uneven number of teams in each conference; if anything, this would get it closer to fair than it currently is. Happy to welcome the Vegas Fat Elvises or whatever they want to call themselves. Just so long as the Nordiques are not part of the equation, I'm happy; if Seattle were, I'd be even happier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted June 1, 2016 Author Share Posted June 1, 2016 Happy to welcome the Vegas Fat Elvises or whatever they want to call themselves. Just so long as the Nordiques are not part of the equation, I'm happy; if Seattle were, I'd be even happier. It's believed the team would be named the Black Knights (though that name would certainly generate more attention, that's for sure). Seattle, unfortunately, has gained no traction with either of their potential arena sites and unless something drastically changes soon, they'll be out of the picture for several more years at the very least. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 It's believed the team would be named the Black Knights (though that name would certainly generate more attention, that's for sure). Seattle, unfortunately, has gained no traction with either of their potential arena sites and unless something drastically changes soon, they'll be out of the picture for several more years at the very least. The owner wants to call them the Black Knights. It'll still be up for public vote. I could see it shorten it up to just Knights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoRP Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 Everybody hates the Yankees or loves them; that's just part of beating down on everybody so often. Montreal is the hockey version of the Yankees. Challenges make us stronger. Welcome Quebec City. Exactly! The last time Habs won the silver mug, beating Quebec 4 straight after a 2-0 deficit, was a feat that inspired the rest of the playoff run. Nothing great is achieved without challenges, and the greater competition, the better you become. I absolutely loved the Nords/Habs rivalry, it's why I watch hockey, the emotion of Habs/Bruins in the playoffs is the best we have had, and it's great. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted June 9, 2016 Share Posted June 9, 2016 Yes, CC is way out to lunch on his Anti-Rivalry reasoning, which is odd for him. Anyways, no Quebec team coming real soon; but who on the Habs would likely be made available in expansion draft, or who will likely be in the protected group? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted June 9, 2016 Author Share Posted June 9, 2016 Anyways, no Quebec team coming real soon; but who on the Habs would likely be made available in expansion draft, or who will likely be in the protected group? Assuming the draft would be before 2017-18 and the 2 year pro = eligible rule, here's a very quick guess: Protected: G (1) - Price D (3) - Subban (automatic, NMC), Petry (automatic, NMC), Beaulieu F (7) - Pacioretty, Galchenyuk, Gallagher, McCarron, Scherbak, hopeful UFA forward signing this offseason, Plekanec Unprotected: G: Condon (pending UFA), Fucale, Lindgren D: Barberio, Emelin, Markov (UFA), Pateryn F: Andrighetto, Bozon, Carr, Crisp, Danault, de la Rose, Desharnais (UFA), Dietz, Ellis, Eller, Flynn (UFA), Friberg, Gregoire, Hanley, Hudon, Johnston, Lernout, Lessio, Matteau, MacMillan, Mitchell, Thrower Exempt: - All unsigned draft picks (including all of 2016's to-be-drafted class) plus: G: McNiven D: Juulsen, Parisi F: Audette, Lehkonen, Reway 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.