Most intense rivalry the Canucks will have?

[Vinny in Vancouver]

Canucks vs TSN

[missioncanucksfan]

Canucks biggest rivals are the same every year.....

 

The Media and their own fan base

[missioncanucksfan]

22 hours ago, Qwags said:

I think in the Flames and Oilers, as many have said, will be our biggest rivals. Though I will miss the days of the Blackhawks, I'm looking forward to Virtanen laying out McDavid.

Ya....just like Cassels was going to do that too right? Yet who is the guy that buried on the 4th line in Utica?

[Monteeun]

19 minutes ago, missioncanucksfan said:

Ya....just like Cassels was going to do that too right? Yet who is the guy that buried on the 4th line in Utica?

what you say? 

[SamJamIam]

17 minutes ago, missioncanucksfan said:

Ya....just like Cassels was going to do that too right? Yet who is the guy that buried on the 4th line in Utica?

What are you on about? No one has ever said Cassels would lay out McDavid. What he did do was shut him down for an entire playoff series.  Plus Cassels was injured as hell after those playoffs and never got to recover before going pro. No surprise he wasn't leading the Comets in minutes after that.

 

Meanwhile Virtanen has already laid out McDavid at last year's young stars. Not too hard to imagine that will continue.

[lmm]

On 7/9/2016 at 7:49 AM, Nex is my ex said:

You don't think this team ever had a true rivalry? I guess you're one of the fans who started watching in 2015 then. Because Boston and Chicago were huge rivals to us

And here is where you are wrong. For a rivalry to exist it MUST go on for a prolonged period, both teams must win in a back and forth swing. For various reasons including geography and the Canucks never staying with the same teams in their division or one or the other team not being able to maintain the competitive angle Canuck rivalries always falter.

Your example of Chicago was as close as it gets for the Canucks because it lasted a few seasons, ( not enough but getting there )

at this point Chicago probably considers LA far above the Canucks because LA won cups to interupt the Chicago dynasty.

As Hobbes!!! alluded to above a rivalry cannot be one sided. If the Canucks did not consider Minnisota to be its rival then the rivalry did not exist.  Likewise the Bruins have had a rivalry with Montreal spanning 9 decades, while the Canuck/Bruin rivalry lasted one seven game series(won by Boston) followed by one regular season game (won by Vancouver). That does not quite cut it as far as rivalries go. 

[lmm]

23 hours ago, smokes said:

Vancouver vs Dallas. The owners hate each other,

there is some definite potential there. just imagine a few years of each team knocking the other out of the playoffs.

Its not there now , but it could happen and it would be fun to watch. 

[Ronalds.Kenins41]

Lets be honest here, we don't really have rivalry right now; just some teams we hate for various reasons and there isn't even any consensus with that either. Bruins were our last one but that kind of died now. Before that it was the hawks. Rivalries are made in the playoffs (one hit, one goal by feisty player or one feisty game doesn't make a rivalry). It takes repeated games back to back with elements like I just mentioned to make one. Also the two teams have to be at the same level. 

 

After having such great rivalries with hawks and bruins think we can all agree that the ones we have right now aren't even close (if we have one at all). When we had the rivalry with hawks there were even people from other fan bases saying it was the second best rivalry after the habs and bruins after 2011 (pretty big compliment). 

 

 

 

 

 

[Ronalds.Kenins41]

15 minutes ago, lmm said:

And here is where you are wrong. For a rivalry to exist it MUST go on for a prolonged period, both teams must win in a back and forth swing. For various reasons including geography and the Canucks never staying with the same teams in their division or one or the other team not being able to maintain the competitive angle Canuck rivalries always falter.

Your example of Chicago was as close as it gets for the Canucks because it lasted a few seasons, ( not enough but getting there )

at this point Chicago probably considers LA far above the Canucks because LA won cups to interupt the Chicago dynasty.

As Hobbes!!! alluded to above a rivalry cannot be one sided. If the Canucks did not consider Minnisota to be its rival then the rivalry did not exist.  Likewise the Bruins have had a rivalry with Montreal spanning 9 decades, while the Canuck/Bruin rivalry lasted one seven game series(won by Boston) followed by one regular season game (won by Vancouver). That does not quite cut it as far as rivalries go. 

It died after Kesler left but it did exist. 

[lmm]

1 minute ago, Ronalds.Kenins41 said:

It died after Kesler left but it did exist. 

I am not so sure it didn't die in the eyes of the Bruins the second they raised the Cup

[EmployeeoftheMonth]

On 7/9/2016 at 7:31 AM, Cowichan Canuck said:

SJ is up there then. Hated them since Thornton's facewash on Henrik. I want Gudbranson to watch that footage on a loop before every game against him, Thornton never had to answer for that disrespect.

 

Hawks-Wings has faded away since the Wings-Avalanche, and especially since Detroit went to the east. A buddy of mine is from St.Louis and thinks STL-CHI are each others biggest rivals now.

 

Really want Seattle to get a team for this exact reason.

 

 

I think (for me at least) there is a difference between hating a team as a fan and a real rivalry. Sometimes an event can cause a rivalry like the Lemieux - Draper incident.

[EmployeeoftheMonth]

On 7/9/2016 at 7:49 AM, Nex is my ex said:

You don't think this team ever had a true rivalry? I guess you're one of the fans who started watching in 2015 then. Because Boston and Chicago were huge rivals to us

I'm sorry but you aren't following what a true rivalry is. A true rivalry is something that just lasts a few seasons. Boston and Chicago were teams we maybe had a grudge with but neither of those are real rivalries.  Perhaps you only started watching in 2011 because we've had plenty of grudges with teams over the last 40+ years, but I wouldn't say this team has ever had another team that is a real rival a la Edmonton/Calgary or Chicago/Detroit or Boston/Montreal. 

[Nex is my ex]

6 minutes ago, EmployeeoftheMonth said:

I'm sorry but you aren't following what a true rivalry is. A true rivalry is something that just lasts a few seasons. Boston and Chicago were teams we maybe had a grudge with but neither of those are real rivalries.  Perhaps you only started watching in 2011 because we've had plenty of grudges with teams over the last 40+ years, but I wouldn't say this team has ever had another team that is a real rival a la Edmonton/Calgary or Chicago/Detroit or Boston/Montreal. 

Vancouver/Calgary ring any bells? Also Vancouver/Chicago was the biggest rivarly in sports in it's prime lol

[Cowichan Canuck]

11 minutes ago, EmployeeoftheMonth said:

I think (for me at least) there is a difference between hating a team as a fan and a real rivalry. Sometimes an event can cause a rivalry like the Lemieux - Draper incident.

Pretty hard to have any recent true rivals when we haven't had any recent success besides one sided 1st round exits.

 

Hating a team is all there is besides pre 2011 history.

 

I used SJ as a response to someone saying Alberta teams are used up, and so are LA teams. That leaves us Arizona and SJ and SJ has way more of a history with us since 2011.

[EmployeeoftheMonth]

1 hour ago, Nex is my ex said:

Vancouver/Calgary ring any bells? Also Vancouver/Chicago was the biggest rivarly in sports in it's prime lol

Not even close. Van/Cal? Sure that was a nice little grudge. But Calgarys main rival has always been Edmonton no matter where each team is in the standings. Also you are grossly over estimating the "rivalry" this team had with Chicago. lol.  I'm not saying their haven't been rivalries I'm saying this team has never had a true rival. A team that no matter what there is a build up to much like the Battle of Alberta or the Blackhawks/Wings. This isn't rocket science. 

 

I'm not talking about little spats that last a few years. I was referring to real rivalries that last for the length of a franchise. Original six rivalries like Boston/Montreal. Geographical rivalries like the Battle of Alberta/California/Ontario. Perhaps I'm not making that clear enough.

[Nucker 67]

EDM - McDavid, Lucic, Kassian (Chiarelli)

CGY - Gaudreau, Monahan, Ferland (Burke)

ANA - Kesler, Getzlaf, Perry

SJ - Thornton, Couture, Pavelski

BOS - Marchand, Chara, Bergeron

CHI - Keith, Kane, Hossa (Quenneville)

LA - Brown, Doughty, Quick (Sutter)

[missioncanucksfan]

23 hours ago, SamJamIam said:

What are you on about? No one has ever said Cassels would lay out McDavid. What he did do was shut him down for an entire playoff series.  Plus Cassels was injured as hell after those playoffs and never got to recover before going pro. No surprise he wasn't leading the Comets in minutes after that.

 

Meanwhile Virtanen has already laid out McDavid at last year's young stars. Not too hard to imagine that will continue.

Oh....Jake laid out McDavid in a meaningless game of teenagers.

 

Was he able to do that during a regular season game?

[Neko]

Always was and always still is, Calgary.  Calgary has improved themselves quite a bit this off season, not exactly saying that they'll make the playoffs but they'll get in the Canucks' way.

 

21 hours ago, EmployeeoftheMonth said:

Not even close. Van/Cal? Sure that was a nice little grudge. But Calgarys main rival has always been Edmonton no matter where each team is in the standings. Also you are grossly over estimating the "rivalry" this team had with Chicago. lol.  I'm not saying their haven't been rivalries I'm saying this team has never had a true rival. A team that no matter what there is a build up to much like the Battle of Alberta or the Blackhawks/Wings. This isn't rocket science. 

 

I'm not talking about little spats that last a few years. I was referring to real rivalries that last for the length of a franchise. Original six rivalries like Boston/Montreal. Geographical rivalries like the Battle of Alberta/California/Ontario. Perhaps I'm not making that clear enough.

The Battle of the Albertas has always been weak since the late 80's, the hate between Calgary and Vancouver is greater than Calgary and Edmonton, just last summer I moved back to Vancouver from Calgary so I know what I'm seeing when I go to the Flames games.

[Ronalds.Kenins41]

1 hour ago, Creepy Crawler said:

Always was and always still is, Calgary.  Calgary has improved themselves quite a bit this off season, not exactly saying that they'll make the playoffs but they'll get in the Canucks' way.

 

The Battle of the Albertas has always been weak since the late 80's, the hate between Calgary and Vancouver is greater than Calgary and Edmonton, just last summer I moved back to Vancouver from Calgary so I know what I'm seeing when I go to the Flames games.

For some reason hasn't really felt like a rivalry recently. The last playoff series we were so bad even with the reffing on our side we couldn't do much(not fun watching games where its clear who wins but games where you have no idea who). In the 2014-2015 one it was clear we were inferior team (despite the joke posts I made back then). The last time they felt like rivals was back in 04. In that series there wasn't as much goonery but the rivalry was made by how close each game was. We tied the game at the end of game 7. Was one of the most entertaining series until 06-07. 

 

 

[Rocky Balboa]

CBC.

 

Not really a rivalry but being able to watch our home opener and it's ceremonies.  The teams that play before us always seem to go into OT and shootout.  Then CBC/Sportsnet decides to show interviews with those teams and then some analyst and then about 30 commercials before cutting to the Canucks game that's half way through the first period.