But how could the Blues have ever won the Cup in 1967?

The earliest they had a shot at it was in 1968, but lost in four games to the Habs.

They (the Blues) have at least been to the finals three times since the "original six" expanded...........the leafs have not, and therefore have the longest "finals drought" among current teams (franchises).
- Doppleganger

At the end of the 68 season how long was the Leafs drought?? How long had the Blues been in existence?

Case closed.

At the end of the 68 season how long was the Leafs drought?? How long had the Blues been in existence?

Case closed.
- burn

At the end of the 67/68 season the leafs drought was one year (approximately).

The Blues did not come into existence until the expansion draft on June 6th 1967 over two months after the leafs won their last Cup...............so the Blues, and the rest of the expansion teams droughts at the end of the 67/68 season would have been 10 months, two months shorter than the leafs.

I think a single cup win would shut everyone up. Anyone who'd say anything negative about them at that point would just be stupid.
- daeth

This is the only valid statement on the entire thread. We have now reached the point where we discuss people who talk about other people who unnecessarily talk about Leaf failings.

As suggested by Daeth it would be infinitly more productive if we stuck to talking about Leaf actual on ice performance or the absence thereof.

At the end of the 67/68 season the leafs drought was one year (approximately).

The Blues did not come into existence until the expansion draft on June 6th 1967 over two months after the leafs won their last Cup...............so the Blues, and the rest of the expansion teams droughts at the end of the 67/68 season would have been 10 months, two months shorter than the leafs.
- Doppleganger

Terrible excuse.... Such nonsense.

How many games did they play from the time they won the cup to the time the next cup was won?? The EXACT same. Enough of the stupidity.


And to further your point the expansion team existed long before the expansion draft, so that point is so far from the truth.

Facts are facts. The droughts were the exact same length. End of story. it's simple math.

I am almost afraid to tread into this stupidity that Dopp is spreading......I have never seen a stat showing a teams championship drought in months......just seasons.......so to say the leafs drought is 564 months vs the blues 562 months is just plain stupid..........(PS i made those numbers up....) The more important number is cups won, reguardless of time, I personally would rather be a leafs fan then a blues fan in this situation...both have gone 48 seasons with no cup...difference is leafs drought started after a championship, not expansion.....

Of all the teams who have ever won the stanley cup, who has the longest cup drought?

Of all the teams who have ever won the stanley cup, who has the longest cup drought?
- Cape Breton Bruins

If you're counting from the beginning of the Stanley Cup, it's the Montreal Victorias, who haven't won the cup since 1899.

However if you're starting from the NHL era, it's the "Ottawa Senators", now at 85 years.

Just in case anyone was wondering, I had a posting drought of 26 seconds in this thread just now.

If you're counting from the beginning of the Stanley Cup, it's the Montreal Victorias, who haven't won the cup since 1899.

However if you're starting from the NHL era, it's the "Ottawa Senators", now at 85 years.
- Morris

Vancouver millionaires?

If you're counting from the beginning of the Stanley Cup, it's the Montreal Victorias, who haven't won the cup since 1899.

However if you're starting from the NHL era, it's the "Ottawa Senators", now at 85 years.
- Morris

So for the Sens, the 58 years between 1934 and 1992 where they were not in the NHL somehow count towards calculating their Stanley Cup drought?

So for the Sens, the 58 years between 1934 and 1992 where they were not in the NHL somehow count towards calculating their Stanley Cup drought?
- Cape Breton Bruins

Depends on whether you want to count them as the same franchise. You could really go either way.

Vancouver millionaires?
- Schenn-Sational!

On the Wiki page they're before the NHL exclusive era, but not counting the challenge cup era (we'll call it the "league era") they have the longest drought at 97 years.

Depends on whether you want to count them as the same franchise.
- Morris

I see. It's an interesting way of looking at it. From your perspective how do you think the Sens could have done a better job of winning the cup during those 58 years besides the obvious hinderence of NOT (frank)ING EXISTING of course?

I see. It's an interesting way of looking at it. From your perspective how do you think the Sens could have done a better job of winning the cup during those 58 years besides the obvious hinderence of NOT (frank)ING EXISTING of course?
- Cape Breton Bruins

Existing again, for starters

But yeah, it's a consideration when you're talking about a lot of the defunct teams that have won (Seattle Metropolitans, Montreal Maroons, Vancouver Millionaires to name a few). It's up to Sens fans really if they want to inherit one Stanley cup and 44 years to their drought on.

I suppose you could talk about an "active drought" or "inactive drought" if you wanted to get really technical. I guess no one really would talk about Czechoslovakia's olympic medal drought, so maybe that's getting farther away from semantic accuracy.

Existing again, for starters

But yeah, it's a consideration when you're talking about a lot of the defunct teams that have won (Seattle Metropolitans, Montreal Maroons, Vancouver Millionaires to name a few). It's up to Sens fans really if they want to inherit one Stanley cup and 44 years to their drought on.

I suppose you could talk about an "active drought" or "inactive drought" if you wanted to get really technical. I guess no one really would talk about Czechoslovakia's olympic medal drought, so maybe that's getting farther away from semantic accuracy.
- Morris

Leafs fans make for excellent tap dancers.

Leafs fans make for excellent tap dancers.
- Cape Breton Bruins

??

Leafs fans make for excellent tap dancers.
- Cape Breton Bruins

Are you a Leafs fan?

??
- Morris

So it is your personal opinion that the Ottawa Senators 85 year drought is legit regardless of the fact they didn't even exist within the NHL for 58 years?

Are you a Leafs fan?
- Schenn-Sational!

I'm A Bruins fan.

I'm A Bruins fan.
- Cape Breton Bruins

I see. So then like Morris, you cannot possess my tap-dancing skills.

So it is your personal opinion that the Ottawa Senators 85 year drought is legit regardless of the fact they didn't even exist within the NHL for 58 years?
- Cape Breton Bruins

He brought it up because Dopple stated that Ottawa had won the cup. So if ttawa was taking the cups from the former team, they should take the drought along with it. If not, then their drought hasn;'t been nearly as long, but then again there is still no cup.

He brought it up because Dopple stated that Ottawa had won the cup. So if ttawa was taking the cups from the former team, they should take the drought along with it. If not, then their drought hasn;'t been nearly as long, but then again there is still no cup.
- mfreedman

i c

even if he claims a BS cup shouldn't the drought end and then start again before and after the years where they dont compete? Its a little silly to include 58 years where the team doesn't (frank)ing exist no?

i c

even if he claims a BS cup shouldn't the drought end and then start again before and after the years where they dont compete? Its a little silly to include 58 years where the team doesn't (frank)ing exist no?
- Cape Breton Bruins

their non-existence just shows you how lousy they were

i c

even if he claims a BS cup shouldn't the drought end and then start again before and after the years where they dont compete? Its a little silly to include 58 years where the team doesn't (frank)ing exist no?
- Cape Breton Bruins

I think the whole thing is pretty inane.

I don't care much about the sens' cup drought, I was mostly talking about the Leafs, Kings and Blues when the thread started.

Terrible excuse.... Such nonsense.

How many games did they play from the time they won the cup to the time the next cup was won?? The EXACT same. Enough of the stupidity.


And to further your point the expansion team existed long before the expansion draft, so that point is so far from the truth.

Facts are facts. The droughts were the exact same length. End of story. it's simple math.
- burn

Yes I'm aware the expansion franchises were awarded sometime around February of 1967, but if you're a leaf fan, and you want to share the misery of having the longest Stanley Cup drought of current teams, then you can have the Blues share it with you. Still doesn't make the 45 years of not even making the finals any less embarrassing.