Montreal Canadiens 1965-1971: 5 Cups in 7 years ala EDM, but less pub?

[c9777666]

From 1965-1971, the Canadiens won 5 Cups in 7 years in basically the same format Edmonton from 1984-1990 won their 5 in 7:

Back to back Cups, playoff upset, back to back Cups, no Cup, win a 5th Cup in 7 years in unexpected fashion with a sensational hot playoff goalie and a mix of old/young

But despite similarities, this Habs Cup run isn't viewed with the same prominence as the Habs runs of 5 straight from 1956-1960 or 4 straight from 1976-1979.

Edmonton did the same thing (5 in 7), but those Oilers are held in higher regard as a dynasty and other Hab Cup runs get more prominence.

Maybe Montreal's 1967 Cup loss to Toronto wasn't an all-time shocker ala EDM's 86 loss to Calgary and the Oilers of 89 did make the playoffs despite their 3-1 blown lead to LA while the 1970 Habs famously missed the playoffs.

This Hab run of 5 in 7 years had its own share of future HHOF'ers (Beliveau, Serge Savard, Cournoyer, Jacques Lemaire, Henri Richard). Granted, it doesn't have the name caliber of Gretzky/Coffey/Messier/Kurri, but they're all in the Hockey Hall of Fame.

For goaltending, Gump Worsley/Grant Fuhr is a tough debate given the eras they played in although Andy Moog was more consistent/reliable than Charlie Hodge's short-lived peak and Rogie Vachon went onto fame elsewhere.

Dryden had a better career than Bill Ranford, but in terms of who had the better Conn Smythe season (1971/1990) that's up for you to debate on.

On one side, MTL did it in a harder era to score, tail end of the original 6, more great players, but fewer playoff rounds.

OTOH, EDM did have higher caliber Finals competition (Islanders, Flyers Bruins), whereas MTL faced 4th place DET in 66, avoided 1st overall DET in 65 and drew 3rd place CHI, and of course the expansion Blues of the late 60s- although beating BOS/CHI in 71 with a rookie was highly impressive.

EDM's dynasty is usually compared with the late 50s Habs/late 70s Habs, but not this version.

Why so? Literally also won 5 Cups in 7 years with legends of the game, but without the fanfare/recgonition of the Oilers.

This team won as many Cups in a short burst of time as the late 50s and one less than the late 70s, but for whatever reason doesn't get talked about ala them or even the Islanders despite also making 5 straight Cup Finals with a loss to another dynasty of that era

Click to read more...

 

[BenchBrawl]

The core was not as memorable as other dynasties, outside Jean Béliveau and Henri Richard, both of which were also important players of the 1950's dynasty.

 

[MadLuke]

The core was not as memorable as other dynasties, outside Jean Béliveau and Henri Richard, both of which were also important players of the 1950's dynasty.

Seem to be something like that, it is sandwiched by 2 more memorable dynastie of the same franchise and those 2 others were in the more prestigious in a row format.

Bobby Rousseau was the second highest scoring Habs in that time frame,

 

[BenchBrawl]

Seem to be something like that, it is sandwiched by 2 more memorable dynastie of the same franchise and those 2 others were in the more prestigious in a row format.

Bobby Rousseau was the second highest scoring Habs in that time frame,

In the 1960's, the memorable team were the Chicago Blackhawks. That they failed to win Stanley Cups like Toronto and Montreal doesn't change that fact. Bobby Hull, Stan Mikita, Pierre Pilote, Glenn Hall... that was the stable core with the most star power in the league, by far.

Whereas in the late 1950's and 1970's, Montreal was "the team", both in terms of championships and memorability. This was also true of the Islanders and Oilers in their respective period of domination in the 1980's, and then Pittsburgh in the early 1990s.

 

[BenchBrawl]

BTW I can't find the article off-hand, but Jean Béliveau himself commented that few people talked about those late-1960's teams despite their success. Pretty sure it was either a Red Fisher or nhl.com article.

 

[The Panther]

Yes, I think Béliveau refers to this era in his book as the "forgotten dynasty".

 

[GMR]

Victims of their own franchise's success. Edmonton had one dynasty. Montreal had numerous. Hence one Montreal dynasty was more forgotten. Also, nobody would forget Edmonton's dynasty because Gretzky played there.

 

[notDatsyuk]

Yes, I think Béliveau refers to this era in his book as the "forgotten dynasty".

Beliveau was really pissed off at the Leafs for 'stealing' the Cup in '67, ruining their 'five in a row'.

That may have been part of it - they only won two, and then there was the Leafs' win, and then all the distraction of expansion with the anticlimactic finals (no fault of the Blues).

 

[Staniowski]

The '50s teams and the late '70s teams were simply more dominant. They were dominant (for the most part) in the regular seasons and were expected to win those Cups.

The teams of the '60s and early '70s were all good teams, lots of good players, but most of those teams weren't as dominant.

 

[EpochLink]

The '50s teams and the late '70s teams were simply more dominant. They were dominant (for the most part) in the regular seasons and were expected to win those Cups.

The teams of the '60s and early '70s were all good teams, lots of good players, but most of those teams weren't as dominant.

The 73 Habs are often forgotten, the 71 got more press than them.

 

[Staniowski]

The 73 Habs are often forgotten, the 71 got more press than them.

Yes, I mentioned in another thread that of the Habs 8 most recent Cup winning teams ('93, '86 and the 6 teams of the '70s), the '73 team is probably the least remembered.

And that '73 was actually quite dominant in the regular season....but is more forgotten - in comparison to '71 and the late '70s teams - for other reasons.

 

[EpochLink]

Yes, I mentioned in another thread that of the Habs 8 most recent Cup winning teams ('93, '86 and the 6 teams of the '70s), the '73 team is probably the least remembered.

And that '73 was actually quite dominant in the regular season....but is more forgotten - in comparison to '71 and the late '70s teams - for other reasons.

They eclipsed the 71 Bruins in terms of most points in a season that year too.

 

[Staniowski]

They eclipsed the 71 Bruins in terms of most points in a season that year too.

Yes, they had quite a few star players who were at or near their best around that time.....Dryden, Lapointe, Savard, P. Mahovlich, Lemaire, Cournoyer. Vets F. Mahovlich, H. Richard, Laperriere were still good players. Good young players Houle and Tardif were gone after that season too.