Cliffy1814
Registered User
- Nov 10, 2011
- 912
- 0
Looks like they skipped celebrating their 90th anniversary of existence this current season and are celebrating their 90th season of play for 2016-17. Wonder what brought on that change of time line? I'll be honest, i'm all for any nod to their history.
Makes sense, because their 90th season anniversary is next season, and not this season (organizations first season was '26-'27)
Makes sense, because their 90th season anniversary is next season, and not this season (organizations first season was '26-'27)
'26-27 was the first season, so 2015-16 would have been the 90th, but they are likely not counting 2004-05. 2016-17 would be the 90th anniversary of their first game, but the 91st season if they counted the canceled lockout year.
'26-27 was the first season, so 2015-16 would have been the 90th, but they are likely not counting 2004-05. 2016-17 would be the 90th anniversary of their first game, but the 91st season if they counted the canceled lockout year.
Wonder if it impacts the heritage jersey at all. They came out with it for the 85th anniversary so who knows if they have anything in store for 90.
This will probably look better as a flat image, as a shoulder patch.
Any predictions on who will make it to the 100th anniversary team? McD has a chance if they make him a lifer. Kreider? Stepan?
All in all, least amount of success in the NHL. Especially given the long history as an original 6 team.1 cup in the last 75 years.
All in all, least amount of success in the NHL. Especially given the long history as an original 6 team.
Speaking of cash grab, I'm down with having a white alternative throw back jersey ala the WC for road games.
That does not change the facts. If the script was that easy to flip, it stands to reason that the Rangers would have won more. And while you do look at things from a historical basis, you can also look at things more recently. 3 Cups in 7 years is impressive. More success than the Rangers have had in 75.Until 5 years ago, the Blackhawks were the least successful. We all know how that stands today.
That does not change the facts. If the script was that easy to flip, it stands to reason that the Rangers would have won more. And while you do look at things from a historical basis, you can also look at things more recently. 3 Cups in 7 years is impressive. More success than the Rangers have had in 75.
But they haven't. And have done so very few times during any great runs in their history.This is pretty obvious, but if they won ONE cup in these last few runs, we'd all have a completely different view of this organization.
Wash, rinse, repeat. Unfortunately for this franchise, that is the typical endgame.We're more desperate now as we watch these great seasons cup up short.