kipwinger 8,518 Report post Posted February 10, 2015 Ok, laying aside the obvious fact that Keith Olbermann is a pretentious dickhead, what do you all think about this? Was the concept of the "Original Six" just a marketing ploy? Is it disingenuous? Or does it even matter? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935 Report post Posted February 10, 2015 I think it's just a game of semantics that Olberman is nitpicking at. I always took "original" to mean before the 1967 expansion. I think it is fairly well known that, in the early years, the NHL was in flux and included teams that don't exist anymore. 1 krsmith17 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Buppy 1,720 Report post Posted February 10, 2015 Fairly certain that "Original 6" started just as a way to differentiate them from the '67 expansion teams. Certainly a marketing tool now though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DickieDunn 2,571 Report post Posted February 10, 2015 He's just another jackass who says things just to get attention, whether he believes it or not. Technically he's right, but the Original 6 doesn't mean the first 6 NHL franchises, it means the 6 teams that were around for years before expansion to 12 teams. 1 krsmith17 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BottleOfSmoke 5,965 Report post Posted February 10, 2015 Confession: I LOVE KEITH OLBERMANN. Taterz gonna tate. *insert picture of potato* Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kipwinger 8,518 Report post Posted February 10, 2015 I do think it calls into question something bigger though. Why do we care about the Original Six if they're not original? Does it really mean anything? Do all these Finns, Swedes, Russians, and Czechs give a damn about a history that's made up? Or is it some talking point they're told to hit on, just like they're required to wear officially sanctioned clothing during interviews? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kipwinger 8,518 Report post Posted February 10, 2015 I still see the Original 6 as who they are perceived to be - the 6 franchises prior to the expansion in 1967...Nothing more - nothing less. Sure, but I guess I'm asking "what does that mean to you"? Like, does that make them special, or more revered? Or does it simply make them older? Is there some sort of inherent rivalry between the teams based on their being "original six", or does that mean squat? It's like we talked about in some rivalry thread a month or two ago. Clearly Boston and Montreal is a solid rivalry between original six teams. So is Detroit-Chicago. But do those rivalries have anything at all to do with being O-6 teams? I mean, Detroit-New York doesn't have the same effect. Neither does Chicago-Toronto. Or maybe, and I'm giving this full credence, the Original Six designation means something (if only) because it's always meant something. Maybe, despite being predicated on very little, its a meaningful part of the hockey tradition because we've all collectively bought into it. Like the "Columbus discovered America" stuff. We've bought into it. It's an institution. It doesn't matter anymore if its not true. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Echolalia 2,961 Report post Posted February 10, 2015 I share the same view as most of the folks here in that the Original Six was meant to distinguish Boston, Detroit, Montreal, Toronto, NY, and Chicago from the first expansion era teams. Having said that, the original six was around for what, 25 years before the league grew? That's a long time to play the same small group of teams over and over again (I think the math comes out to teams playing one another about 10 times a season), and as such, I think the rivalries went quite deep, even after the expansion. 25 years is also a long time to establish history before other teams permanently joined in, so by the time the expansion came around, the original six already had two and a half decades of wins, losses, Stanley Cup victories, stories of overcoming odds, injuries, animosity, etc; two and a half decades of history was well established at that point. Back then, if I'm a casual fan just getting started with the game of hockey, I'm taking an interest to the original six because of that history and because of those aleady well-established rivalries. If I'm trying to market the game, I'm utilizing the original six to sell tickets and merchendise, again, because of those rivalries and history that the expansion era teams had initially lacked. Today, obviously there's a good deal of history for most clubs, and rivalries all across the board. I don't think the Wings have a rivalry with any particular team, and most of the history and rivalries our fans are most passionate about are those which they can remember and were a part of. So games against Chicago are special. Games against Anaheim are special. Games against Pittsburgh are special. Games against Toronto, Montreal, NY? Not so much these days, other than Toronto's fanbase invading the Joe and making the crowds louder. Of course media is still going to market the original six, and I think these days its more of a cultural thing to put them up on a pedestal, and if you truly are passionate about the history that's there, then awesome! But there's a lot of other teams out there with a lot of stories to tell also. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VM1138 1,921 Report post Posted February 10, 2015 It means something because people like history. These are the oldest teams with vaunted histories and legends. That's all. There's no rule they have to be rivals. Detroit and Chicago, for example, have been rivals in several sports. But the legends and the rivalries that do exist have had time to mature and get intense. Newer teams with shorter histories just don't have the same experience. 1 PavelValerievichDatsyuk reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BottleOfSmoke 5,965 Report post Posted February 10, 2015 Sure, but I guess I'm asking "what does that mean to you"? Like, does that make them special, or more revered? Or does it simply make them older? Is there some sort of inherent rivalry between the teams based on their being "original six", or does that mean squat? It's like we talked about in some rivalry thread a month or two ago. Clearly Boston and Montreal is a solid rivalry between original six teams. So is Detroit-Chicago. But do those rivalries have anything at all to do with being O-6 teams? I mean, Detroit-New York doesn't have the same effect. Neither does Chicago-Toronto. Or maybe, and I'm giving this full credence, the Original Six designation means something (if only) because it's always meant something. Maybe, despite being predicated on very little, its a meaningful part of the hockey tradition because we've all collectively bought into it. Like the "Columbus discovered America" stuff. We've bought into it. It's an institution. It doesn't matter anymore if its not true. Honestly, I think it is a lot of the latter. Humans love arbitrary "labels" and making meaning out of things that are mundane. I think being "first" at something or "original" in the sense of existing before some sort of change is inherently important to a lot of people. Whether that has meaning in itself or meaning because we give it arbitrary meaning I think depends on the importance individual people give to created groupings. I think I confused myself 2 jimmyemeryhunter and amato reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kipwinger 8,518 Report post Posted February 10, 2015 Honestly, I think it is a lot of the latter. Humans love arbitrary "labels" and making meaning out of things that are mundane. I think being "first" at something or "original" in the sense of existing before some sort of change is inherently important to a lot of people. Whether that has meaning in itself or meaning because we give it arbitrary meaning I think depends on the importance individual people give to created groupings. I think I confused myself Look at you go, you little intellectual. Don't let BoS fool you, folks. There's more to this lady than her potty humor and arbitrary references to pop culture would suggest! 2 jimmyemeryhunter and amato reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jersey Wing 1,521 Report post Posted February 10, 2015 What utter crap. I like when Olbermann holds people to account, especially stupid people in sports. He can also be a boor. As far as the Original Six, I have a hat with the Detroit, Boston, Montreal, Toronto, NYR and Berwyn logos. It says right on the hat "Original Six" on the front and "Old Time Hockey" on the back. Guess that proves Olbermann wrong. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Buppy 1,720 Report post Posted February 10, 2015 ... the original six was around for what, 25 years before the league grew? ... 25 years of only the O6, plus another 16 years prior to that with all 6 in operation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kipwinger 8,518 Report post Posted February 10, 2015 (edited) What utter crap. I like when Olbermann holds people to account, especially stupid people in sports. He can also be a boor. As far as the Original Six, I have a hat with the Detroit, Boston, Montreal, Toronto, NYR and Berwyn logos. It says right on the hat "Original Six" on the front and "Old Time Hockey" on the back. Guess that proves Olbermann wrong. When I was a kid, I had a t-shirt depicting Calvin and Hobbes peeing on a Ford Truck logo. It proves, at the very least, how the Calvin, Hobbes, and Ford hierarchy shakes out. Edited February 10, 2015 by kipwinger 2 jimmyemeryhunter and Jersey Wing reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kipwinger 8,518 Report post Posted February 10, 2015 You're such a redneck. EDIT - we all know that Ford is vastly superior to the crap that GM, and Chrysler - erm - Fiat produces I've got no skin in the game. I'd drive a golf cart to work as long as Detroiters built it. 1 jimmyemeryhunter reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vladdy16 2,154 Report post Posted February 10, 2015 Hockey embodies respect, and not a small part of that comes from paying due to those that came before. O6 teams highlighted arguably the best players that will ever play the game. Honoring the traditions of hockey is, at least to my generation, part of what makes this game special. There's a reverence afforded to Maurice Richard and Gordie Howe that will probably never be reproduced, as much as the league is attempting to force certain players into that strata. Fans of expansion teams have the advantage of (hopefully) watching their teams grow and being witness to many firsts that fans of O6 teams will never get to experience, but I wouldn't trade my respect for and pride in the Original 6 for anything, and that's something they'll never get to experience. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Echolalia 2,961 Report post Posted February 10, 2015 When I was a kid, I had a t-shirt depicting Calvin and Hobbes peeing on a Ford Truck logo. It proves, at the very least, how the Calvin, Hobbes, and Ford hierarchy shakes out. Just a side note because I'm so passionate about Calvin and Hobbes, but those logos frustrate me, because they were all illegal use of Calvin and Hobbes. Watterson intentionally avoided marketing Calvin and Hobbes memoribia because he thought the whole concept was completely against the whole idea behind his comic, and Calvin and Hobbes as characters. Somebody, somehwere made the Calvin pissing logo and before long it was everywhere, with Calvin peeling on all sorts of different logos and what not. Pursuing a ceast and desist or lawsuit was difficult due to how many different companies were involved and how widespread it got. So it persisted, and Calvin peeing became an iconic image, with everyone pretty much using the image freely. Watterson got nothing for anyone using the image, and frankly he didn't want anything (or the image to even be out there in the first place). Anyway, it has nothing to do with hockey. I'm just a diehard Calvin and Hobbes fan and saw the opportunity to vent. Carry on! 1 jimmyemeryhunter reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DickieDunn 2,571 Report post Posted February 11, 2015 When I was a kid, I had a t-shirt depicting Calvin and Hobbes peeing on a Ford Truck logo. It proves, at the very least, how the Calvin, Hobbes, and Ford hierarchy shakes out. Just a side note because I'm so passionate about Calvin and Hobbes, but those logos frustrate me, because they were all illegal use of Calvin and Hobbes. Watterson intentionally avoided marketing Calvin and Hobbes memoribia because he thought the whole concept was completely against the whole idea behind his comic, and Calvin and Hobbes as characters. Somebody, somehwere made the Calvin pissing logo and before long it was everywhere, with Calvin peeling on all sorts of different logos and what not. Pursuing a ceast and desist or lawsuit was difficult due to how many different companies were involved and how widespread it got. So it persisted, and Calvin peeing became an iconic image, with everyone pretty much using the image freely. Watterson got nothing for anyone using the image, and frankly he didn't want anything (or the image to even be out there in the first place). Anyway, it has nothing to do with hockey. I'm just a diehard Calvin and Hobbes fan and saw the opportunity to vent. Carry on! Watterson draws a C&H strip every day and throws it away. He also did a guest stint for Pearls Before Swine a couple months ago. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vladdy16 2,154 Report post Posted February 11, 2015 HUGE C&H fan, but let's get back to hockey, shall we? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mckinley25 677 Report post Posted February 11, 2015 Huh - ya learn sumthin new everyday.....I never would've guessed that you like 'Calvin & Hobbes'. There are few things better. HUGE C&H fan, but let's get back to hockey, shall we? Oops sorry. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
55fan 5,133 Report post Posted February 11, 2015 I was born in the O6 era. I recall my dad saying that if you can't root for Detroit (in the playoffs), root for an Original 6 team. The rest are just interlopers. Boys playing with the men. He was still saying that when he passed in '09. For the older folks, it's about remembering when and being proud that they were around to witness it. For me, it's kind of hard to think of teams that are almost as old as I am as "new". I'm not really sure what it means to this generation. Just, for the love of Pete, DON'T refer to the "original 12". Makes my skin crawl. Of course, to the younger generation, the O6 and Second 6 kind of are the O12. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites