heading to the Pond Wednesday night for some hockey !
No city has ever had both the Grey Cup and the Stanley Cup Champions in the same season. That possibility stills remains....
Go Canucks ! ! !


Moderator: Team Captains
You are wrong about this.So Cal Lion wrote:No city has ever had both the Grey Cup and the Stanley Cup Champions in the same season. That possibility stills remains....
It has actually happened several times.Robbie wrote:You are wrong about this.So Cal Lion wrote:No city has ever had both the Grey Cup and the Stanley Cup Champions in the same season. That possibility stills remains....![]()
Regardless of whether you go by calendar year or by the year the season starts, the city of Edmonton accomplished that feat in 1987. As I mentioned earlier, the Edmonton Eskimos won the Grey Cup in November 1987. The Edmonton Oilers won the Stanley Cup in the 1986-87 season, and then again in the 1987-88 season.
Hockey has a greater presence at the elite level outside of just the NHL -- there's all the tournaments: Canada/World Cup, Olympics, World (Junior) Championships, and also the CHL. By comparison, (Cdn) football has precious few of these "elite" extras; those that do exist are seldom seen on TV (aside from the Vanier Cup).JohnHenry wrote:The simplistic response would be that hockey is more popular than football in Canada. So if hockey is so popular why then did only 144,000 Canadians watch the NHL playoff game last week on TSN? That same station gets triple the ratings for a regular season CFL game.
I think part of the answer is that hockey touches everyone in Canada, kids, seniors, workers, nerds, sports fans, ect...while football is more of a niche sport. Either you are a football fan, or you are not. Hockey is mainstream in Canada and appeals to almost everyone.
Good list, Hambone.Hambone wrote:It has actually happened several times.Robbie wrote:You are wrong about this.So Cal Lion wrote:No city has ever had both the Grey Cup and the Stanley Cup Champions in the same season. That possibility stills remains....![]()
Regardless of whether you go by calendar year or by the year the season starts, the city of Edmonton accomplished that feat in 1987. As I mentioned earlier, the Edmonton Eskimos won the Grey Cup in November 1987. The Edmonton Oilers won the Stanley Cup in the 1986-87 season, and then again in the 1987-88 season.
Stanley Cup and Grey Cup wins in same city and same calendar year:
GC Edmonton Eskimos 1987; SC Edmonton Oilers 1986-87
GC Montreal Alouettes 1977; SC Montreal Canadiens 1976-77
GC Toronto Argos 1947; SC Toronto Maple Leafs 1946-47
GC Toronto Argos 1945; SC Toronto Maple Leafs 1944-45
GC Toronto RCAF Hurricanes 1942; SC Toronto Maple Leafs 1941-42
GC Montreal Winged Wheelers 1931; SC Montreal Canadiens 1930-31
GC Toronto Argos 1914; SC Toronto Blueshirts 1913-1914
There were other overlaps where the Grey Cup was brought home to a city in the fall and with the Stanley Cup following in the spring leaving that city proud holders of both from spring until fall:
GC Montreal Alouettes 1970; SC Montreal Alouettes 1970-71
GC Toronto Argos 1947; SC Toronto Maple Leafs 1947-48
GC Toronto Argos 1946; SC Toronto Maple Leafs 1946-47
GC Ottawa Senators 1926 (this was just before Ottawa changed their name back to Rough Riders); SC Ottawa Senators 1926-27
GC Toronto Argos 1921; SC Toronto St. Pats 1921-22
:lol:Blitz wrote:I don't resent that fans in Vancouver go crazy over the Canucks when they have some playoff success because those moments are very rare.
Waddya mean "alas I'm in Portland"??!? Portland is a great city. Fantastic beer city in particular. Why waste your time with something as dreary as a hockey game when you're in the presence of so much good beer? Long live the Lucky Labrador!Hambone wrote:I would've loved to have heard a little of that sort of excitement. Normally I would've been watching the game in one of my favourite Prince George watering holes which no doubt would've been packed and exuberant at the outcome. But alas I'm in Portland where I have located one downtown restaurant and bar that I've come to count on to have whatever playoff games available. The guy who came in and sat at the next table made it two of us in there who were interested in the game. He grew up in Salem and used to get up to Vancouver for a game or two every year when he was a kid because his dad's company had connections for Canuck ducats. So he became a Canuck fan. Two people don't make for much "atmosphere".smphantom wrote:Good point David. I thought the same thing last night when I heard all the horns and commotion up and down Lonsdale Avenue in North Vancouver. Wow, they barely managed to squeak by Dallas and win a first round - not the Cup for heck's sake and everyone goes nuts??!![]()
hmmm......a little defensive there what with the card of Jim "Portland Pig" Evenson?Lions4ever wrote:Waddya mean "alas I'm in Portland"??!? Portland is a great city. Fantastic beer city in particular. Why waste your time with something as dreary as a hockey game when you're in the presence of so much good beer? Long live the Lucky Labrador!
Don't sell football fans short. The discrepancy between hockey and football TV viewership is not that great.JohnHenry wrote:The simplistic response would be that hockey is more popular than football in Canada. So if hockey is so popular why then did only 144,000 Canadians watch the NHL playoff game last week on TSN? That same station gets triple the ratings for a regular season CFL game.
I think part of the answer is that hockey touches everyone in Canada, kids, seniors, workers, nerds, sports fans, ect...while football is more of a niche sport. Either you are a football fan, or you are not. Hockey is mainstream in Canada and appeals to almost everyone.
That in itself may be the underlying reason for what fans might consider to be a lack of Leo coverage when compared to puck coverage. A game is a game. Regardless of sport there really is only so much that can be said or written about a game be it pre-game analysis or the game post mortem. During hockey playoffs there usually is only 48 hours between games to cover what transpired in the last one and set up the next one. For football that 2 day window becomes a 7 day window. The short hockey window makes the Canuck media coverage look very intense. Conversely with the long football window the perception of lesser coverage may simply be a case of having to spread the same volume of content out over a longer period of time.B.C.FAN wrote:One could conclude the Lions get just as much attention as the Canucks when they're in the playoffs. They just don't play as often.
Factually incorrect. But typical of the center of universe mentallity.No city has ever had both the Grey Cup and the Stanley Cup Champions in the same season.