OT: Would you guys be interested in a documentary that covers the Habs from 1996 - 2004

[madhi19]

I invested/ingested heavily in booze to blackout those years. So no am not interested.

 

[ROEN]

I honestly can't wait to see this now. One thing I always wondered was what was actually going behind the scenes and in particularly the drafting. We all know the questionable trades and all the prospects that didn't work out but it's good to get some more context on the dark days. It's the reason why I bought Terry Ryan's book because it help shed some light on what was going on during those days.

Ryan's book was great. But there are so many stories in those years that sank that locker room, stuff between Vigneault and Hoglund, Bouillon's play forcing Scott Lachance and Barry Richter to the press box, the famous 'crease crisis' between Theodore & Hackett, Rejean Houle avoiding Corson and his agent, Molson refusing to up spending pas 30mill and desperatly trying to get rid of the team, Prospal calling Brisebois a frog .. I mean I could spend day browsing the Web looking at old headlines and giggling ...

 

[Conflicted Habs fan]

Really would like to see stories about hockey life behind the scenes in this period rather than from the official propaganda that we're constantly being saturated with today or even maybe a deliberately ironic juxtaposition of contemporary official media releases for public consumption with what actually was going on.

 

[FuzzyWuzzy]

1996 - 2004 habs pepe is rarest pepe. top dank pepe.

 

[mitchmagic]

Niche film. Very few people would watch it outside of die hard Habs fans (ie people on this board.)

 

[DekeLikeYouMeanIt]

Sure. They were painful and ****** but do it.

 

[AntonCH]

The deepest darkest part of Africa years?
The years that came close to turning me into a casual fan?

No thanks. Living through them once was enough, no need to go through that ever again.
EVER!

 

[All-Star]

Considering I boycoted the Habs from the Roy trade all the way to when Savard took over, i'd be interested for sure in seeing this.

Awesome idea!

 

[OnTheRun]

Dark years history ... best forgotten.

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

 

[Team_Spirit]

I would.

But something on the life of Dickie Moore would be better, imo.

 

[FerrisRox]

I watch a lot of documentaries, and a lot of sports documentaries, but I don't think there's nearly enough of a story there to sustain anything close to a compelling film.

 

[Treb]

Looking at our first round picks from these years is... depressing.

Brad Brown
Terry Ryan
Matt Higgins
Jason Ward
Eric Chouinard

And then people **** on Timmins

Also, the documentary is a great idea!

 

[MarkovsKnee]

There were always stories coming out of the Habs dressing room in that era that there were several cliques, and they barely talked to each other. There was so much drama. Koivu vs Ribeiro being a big one.

That era wasn't just dark because of behind the scenes issues. They also had some horrifically traumatic injuries, and I saw it all. Brian Savage's broken neck. Trent McCleary taking a slap shot to the throat, and hurrying off the ice before passing out at the benches because he lost his airway. Donald Audette getting his arm sliced after he fell and it was skated over. OMG, the blood.

Hell, they even managed to get snowed in in Carolina. They were playing a back to back with Washington the next night. The Habs requested that the Caps game be rescheduled and the NHL refused. The Habs got into Washington around 2 p.m. for a 7 p.m game and played with little to no sleep. I think they spent the night at the airport, while waiting for clearance to take off. Boy, was that a fun game!

That whole era was just one big cluster****. No one wanted to play in Montreal. Horrible times, and yeah, I'd watch a documentary on it. I want to know how bad it all really got.

 

[HabsCowboysOwn]

It sounds great man I would watch it for sure!

 

[Scriptor]

I watch a lot of documentaries, and a lot of sports documentaries, but I don't think there's nearly enough of a story there to sustain anything close to a compelling film.

Obviously, The Habs winning another Cup by the end of your dark years would be a perfect ending. Up to 1993, The Habs had never gone more than 7 years without winning a Cup! 22 years later, we're still waiting for the next one, the elusive 25th…

I don't see the full pertinence of your proposed time frame and wonder if it doesn't have more to do with access you might have to principals that were there at that time. The start is logical because it is near enough to our last Cup in 1993 and right around the first in a series of three lockouts. In '92, the players had striked for a greater control in marketing rights and the share of playoff revenue more than doubled for the players (from 3.2 Million to 7.5 Million). From the '94-'95 lockout, owners began making a case for an unhealthy financial picture in the NHL that required a solution.

The end of the time period covered by your proposed documentary is supposed to be tantamount to the end of the 'dark years'. Why did the dark years end at that precise moment? What was the turning point? What exactly changed? Who was instrumental in bringing this change about? Where's the evidence? What exactly qualifies as "dark years" a period that goes from day 'x' to day 'y'? Are we exaggerating the time frame? Are we not going far enough?

For starters, you need to define what makes for the 'dark years' and be credible in that definition. Those years should be the worst years to qualify and make that period as notorious as it sounds. If the audience buys the 'dark years', they will follow the story. At least, initially.

As another poster suggested, you need backstory (the success of one of the most storied sports franchises in the world, a spoiled but knowledgeable fan base, etc.) to demonstrate the tragedy of the arrival of the "dark years" and, perhaps, help show what had gone wrong in mismanagement during the "dark years". It can perhaps later be used as a comparison to show how current management may be returning to a successful style of the past.

I am really fond of the image you suggested in one of your posts. Celebration and ceremony from the dynasty years could be followed by a flame at Center ice that is blown out, leaving a trail of black smoke to signal the arrival of the dark years. The end of the dark years could show some of the modern opening day ceremonies that herald the past glory, wow the imagination, and give hope for the future.

Professional sports sell hope. As much as we like to claim that we can appreciate a good show, if our home team is assured to miss the playoffs before the season even starts, you can start counting the empty seats. A majority of seats may already have been bought as season tickets but, even companies will have trouble finding takers for their freebies...

You need some compelling hope for the future at the end of your documentary, something that clearly demonstrates a transition back to the light. Otherwise, it's tantamount to saying, "Didn't The Habs really suck from this day to that day!? They're not that bad nowadays but, Man they were bad…" It falls a bit flat and the audience would feel cheated to have followed the odyssey of the "dark years".

Even without winning another Cup since '93, if we had recently made it to the finals (like PITT under Therrien) and were stacked with one of the youngest teams that was brimming with incredible talent, then there'd be a compelling case for hope going forward; the team that is on the brink of coming into it's own and leaving it's mark on the league once it has finally matured!. A comparison of budding young stars from the present to heralded heroes from our dynasty years would make the documentary come full circle and sell the hope.

If you take the 7 year window between Stanley Cups (at it's worst before '93), there had been legitimate chances of winning one that were disappointing losses. Since then, we haven't really come close and that persists beyond the end point of your dark years. I'm wondering what the turning point out of the "dark years" really is? When and how does the light start filtering through and begin to chase away heavy clouds of despair?

Where is the Eldorado we are searching for as a fan base? Is it close? Was the end of the "dark years" just the beginning of a long, trudging step as the organization could finally gasp for air or a renewed hope for a return to past glory? Perhaps future glory will take on a different look than past glory because the league has changed, players have changed and society has changed. If so, what might that future glory look like? What does our road towards it look like. Are we, as an organization, on our way?

That's where your end point of the "dark years" becomes more dubious. Whatever the resolution to your story is, there is plenty of years following the "dark years" to potentially invalidate or, at least, diminish the impact of your message. Better to end the "dark years" closer to the present day to make the better future more credible. Outside of diehard fans, few can honestly say that they have been constantly elated by the Habs' performances since the proposed end to your "dark years" (2004 or so).

There's definitely something riveting to be done. Perhaps with a little help from Bergevin, the resolution to your documentary can come to life. You need to define your story to make it more engaging…

Good luck.

 

[Brainiac]

The dark years started the very day Houle and Tremblay were hired. I still remember shaking my head in disbelief when it was announced. Houle. A freaking beer truck driver was our GM.

And all that mess was partly repaired when Gainey took over (really).

Gainey had his share of issues, especially in his last couple of years. But if there's one thing he did right it was to put the franchise back on track. Our current core was assembled during his tenure.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Honestly, no.

This was an embarassing, shameful and painful period that lasted way too long.Way, way too long.

I prefer analyzing the 90 years of prior glory.

 

[BenchBrawl]

The dark years started the very day Houle and Tremblay were hired. I still remember shaking my head in disbelief when it was announced. Houle. A freaking beer truck driver was our GM.

And all that mess was partly repaired when Gainey took over (really).

Gainey had his share of issues, especially in his last couple of years. But if there's one thing he did right it was to put the franchise back on track. Our current core was assembled during his tenure.

Maybe but if the rumors are true about the Lecavalier trade he almost did worst than Houle's overall era in one single trade.He settled for a magnificient trade for Scott Gomez even though any 11 years old hfboards poster knew since they were 9 years old that Gomez was finished.It's not like the Gomez decline caught anyone by surprise.

 

[Scintillating10]

I've been researching a lot lately on the subject for a friend who is working on a book that covers the 'dark period' in Habs history. The documentary would include some footage (drafts etc ...) and interviews from players from that era and how difficult things were from the inside in those years. The whole narration that accompanies it would be from players, staff etc ...

We have a working title, we'd like to probe a bit of interest on the subject before we take it to the next level and get a whole bunch of feedback on what you guys would like to see and hear.

Thanks a bunch in advance

Why then? It was our worst era

 

[Bacchus1]

I really don't know how interesting it would be. I mean, if it shed interesting light on the problem, it could be interesting in a gossipy sort of way. But I think for the most part it is pretty obvious what happened. The budget was slashed, a couple of incompetent clowns were given the reigns, and those guys did a bad job in every department from drafting to training, to player development. The only way it could be remotely interesting is if it completely tarnished the reputations of Molson and Corey so that no Montreal landmark was ever named after them, ever. But that might be just petty. In terms of players being fools, and cliques developing, I think it would be small minded and morning. Like reading the national inquierer for hockey players. I'm glad that era is over. I'd watch it if is insightful, intelligent, mature, and if you could learn something of value from it.

 

[BlackStar]

As my private message to you clearly indicates, I'm deeply interested in that era--an era that unbeknownst to me at the time as a new fan, was the darkest period of a franchise that had shone so brightly throughout all of its history.

I am looking forward to this, to say the least.

 

[Kimota]

I always feel like there's never enough covered and said about sport organizations and I feel like what ESPN are doing with their Docs should be done more and in deeper fashion and in a wider way. Like when they released the Habs Box Set about the Greatest Matches, I wish there would stuff like this, DVD Box sets for all seasons with docs and commentary. I would buy them all. I believe there's a market for this that is poorly exploited.

About the Dark Years, remember the term coined for when Judas betrayed Jesus "For a Bag of Coins" or something like that? Well the title could be "For a Bag of Peanuts" would describe the Roy fiasco and what happened since.

The dark years started the very day Houle and Tremblay were hired. I still remember shaking my head in disbelief when it was announced. Houle. A freaking beer truck driver was our GM.

And all that mess was partly repaired when Gainey took over (really).

Gainey had his share of issues, especially in his last couple of years. But if there's one thing he did right it was to put the franchise back on track. Our current core was assembled during his tenure.

In my opinion Andre Savard did a far better job of "putting the franchise back on track".

I always viewed the hiring of Gainey as the Habs hiring him to calm everybody down and all it did was buy the management some time in the fans accepting being patient just cause it was "Legendary Bob Gainey" at the helm. But it was smoke and mirrors.

I think A. Savard was less patient and the Habs would have become better far quickly with him.

 

[Scriptor]

I always feel like there's never enough covered and said about sport organizations and I feel like what ESPN are doing with their Docs should be done more and in deeper fashion and in a wider way. Like when they released the Habs Box Set about the Greatest Matches, I wish there would stuff like this, DVD Box sets for all seasons with docs and commentary. I would buy them all. I believe there's a market for this that is poorly exploited.

About the Dark Years, remember the term coined for when Judas betrayed Jesus "For a Bag of Coins" or something like that? Well the title could be "For a Bag of Peanuts" would describe the Roy fiasco and what happened since.



In my opinion Andre Savard did a far better job of "putting the franchise back on track".

I always viewed the hiring of Gainey as the Habs hiring him to calm everybody down and all it did was buy the management some time in the fans accepting being patient just cause it was "Legendary Bob Gainey" at the helm. But it was smoke and mirrors.

I think A. Savard was less patient and the Habs would have become better far quickly with him.

Savard had a better eye for talent as well...

 

[wedge]

Honestly, no.

This was an embarassing, shameful and painful period that lasted way too long.Way, way too long.

I prefer analyzing the 90 years of prior glory.

Theres already a ton of documentaries about thst. This idea about the dark years is nice and never been done before. I'd like to know more about these years.

 

[DAChampion]

Wasn't Andre Savard a good GM?