When in Doubt Compare to Batman

I got this email shortly after Rink Rat Feedback posted, originally I was just going to edit it into the original post but the more and more I answered the question, I thought it deserved a new entry. More Rink Rat Feedback!

Reading back on some of your other posts I saw that you’re trying to stay away from Bruins talk and just focus on Hockey in General, but just out of curiosity if you go back to any point in NHL history and relive that era over again (or for the first time) what era would you pick? Catch is you don’t know any outcomes or look into the team’s future. Personally I’d go with Orr’s Bruins, it’s not everyday you get to watch greatness night in and night out, plus you get to see the Stanley Cup wins. – Mike, Nashua, NH


Don’t worry about the Bruins talk, I’ve thrown the rulebook out the window at this point. It’s true it’d be hard to pick against seeing Orr, especially since I’ve only seen footage of him because I was born in the 80’s. But honestly I hear so many old people that had jumped off the B’s bandwagon after Orr last town it makes me sick. I don’t want to be one of those bitter old men (I probably wouldn’t be regardless, but you never know).

I’d say it’s a toss up between the late 80’s-early 90’s B’s or the current regime. The late 80’s B’s would be amazing to see again, but I would ultimately be frustrated watching them not be able to win it all, or not signing that one final piece to the roster puzzle. It would almost be worth it though to see Bourque and Neely in their prime.

But the current regime (2006/07 season to current) is that rags to riches story that I’m an absolute sucker for. You have to remember that two season ago these guys were playing, coached and ran terribly. They finally find their stride by going back to what made them popular to begin with. Which as a fan, frustrates me a little bit. It’s almost like the Batman movie series. “Batman” and “Batman Returns” were great because they were dark, cool gadgets, tongue in cheek humor, a few headline actors but mostly comprised of (at the time) role players. Then for “Forever” and “Batman and Robin” Joel Schumacher comes around and says basically changes everything you like about the series. Everything is bright, anime like, bat-mobile glows in the dark and rides up walls, Robin is brought in, camp humor etc. Not only that but every actor was the 90’s flavor of the month at one point – George Clooney, Val Kilmer, Jim Carrey, Nicole Kidman, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Tommy Lee Jones, Chris O’Donnel, Alicia Silverstone, Uma Thurman, etc.

Then they stop making the movies for awhile, then “Batman Begins” comes out, starts everything over. Batman is dark again, he can fight, no stupid one liners, basically were on a revamped version of the two we liked, and I’m sitting here saying “did those two crappy ones need to happen?” If the Bruins stuck to their guns to what ultimately made them successful, blue collar, hard working, role players (with a few headliners) they wouldn’t be in the basement of Boston’s fandom. It maybe because they tried to sign the “one last piece of the puzzle” too late, and in reality needed two pieces. But come the late 90’s early 00’s we had more of a finesse team than a smash mouth team, not only that but an underachieving finesse team. There’s nothing people in Boston hate more than to watch a bunch of guys trying too hard to look good, and don’t in the process.

But now we have the hardworking (can’t use underdog status after last season) smash mouth team that resembles the Big bad Bruins. And I’m sitting here saying “why didn’t we keep doing what made us successful?” Which is easy for me to say as a fan, but I’m sure it’s not that simple working in the front office. With Batman, even though I love the first two, I prefer the current series. I’m thinking the same with the Bruins, even though I love the older B’s, this current squad seems special. I’m just hoping I don’t read this a few years from now saying, “God, what was I talking about.”

But I think I’m going to take this question one step further, and lay out all of the eras of the league I’d prefer to go back to, catch is it’s a period you already witnessed.

NFL: Do you think I’m going to go back to when the Patriots were the doormats of the league, and every Sunday the Cowboys were winning on national TV? Good, because I’m not. But I’m a little torn on this one. Because the current NFL machine sickens me – I hate that everything about it - uniformed merchandising, all about money, playing regular season games in Europe, NFL network. So I’m going to say I’ll go back to 1996-2005 and just play that on loop for me, everything after is frustration and heartache.

NHL: Honestly – and I know I’m going to get crap for this – I prefer the current post lock out NHL. I really do. Though it’s tempting to go back and see Lemieux, Gretzky, Lindros, Bourque, etc part of seeing those guys comes with several annoyances – the Trap, tons of different mismatching jerseys for every team, tickets that cost a fortune, and a decade that had both the New York Rangers and Montreal Canadiens win the cup. And I saw all of that, and it was entertaining. But now you have guys like Ovechkin, Malkin, Crosby, Towes, Kane, etc. I’m not trying to compare these guys to living legends but I’m not one for the school of thought, “You’d rather see Ovechkin play over Lemieux?” It seems silly now to argue a sure thing, already happened career vs the mystery box. Unless you have a crystal ball you don’t know what the future of these guys is. Maybe I do sound a little like Peter Griffin right now weighing out the boat vs a mystery box, “A boat is a boat. But the mystery box could be anything! It could even be a boat! You know how much we wanted one of those!” Wait, actually that sounds exactly like my argument. Moving on.

MLB: Though it pains me in every way to say this, but I’m going back to the 1998-2005 era. Listen, I hate PEDs more than anyone you know, and is part of the reason why I’m not as big as a fan as I was during the steroid era. But if I could go back, not knowing these clowns were juiced up, I would in a second – because it was the most exciting baseball I’ve ever seen. That’s when I lived and died on baseball -rivalries were rich, every pitch was important, Pedro was in his prime, 2004 Sox championship, life was good before the steroid scandal ruined it for me.

NBA: Bird era. It was that simple.

MLS: I know you’re probably thinking “why the hell is MLS on here?” I’ll save my why hockey fans should embrace MLS for another post. I’m a fairly new fan to the MLS, with the young league and so far no glory years for the local team, I’ll just say I wish I got into it a few years earlier. Not quite as far back when the league was still an Americanized joke, but right about the beginning when the league started saying “ditch the Americanized crap, if we put out a decent product people will start watching” which from what I’ve read was probably 2005 or 2006 season, (so I only missed a couple of the decent years). Seriously give it a chance, it’s pretty good to watch during the hockey off season. But again more on that later.

Questions, comments and feedback email me at nehockeyguy@yahoo.com