You are here: Home / Morning Links / Boston Is Once Again TitleTown

Boston Is Once Again TitleTown

June 16, 2011 By

Since February 3rd, 2002, the city of Boston has seen three Super Bowl champions, Two World Series champions, an NBA championship, and now a Stanley Cup championship. (You can also throw in three NCAA Men’s Hockey championships.)

10 years, 10 titles (7 professional).  That’s a run.

The Bruins became the latest addition to the championship run with their 4-0 game seven win over the Vancouver Canucks last night, taking home their first Stanley Cup championship since 1972.

Bruins reign supreme - Steve Conroy has the long wait blissfully over. More game stories from Fluto Shinzawa | Matt Kalman | Joe Haggerty | Greg Beacham (AP) | Mike Loftus | Mick Colageo | Rich Garven | Ian Clark | Douglas Flynn | Kirk Minihane | DJ Bean 

Bruins earn their hockey immortality - Joe Haggerty says that three words describe this Bruins team – Depth, character and toughness. Stephen Harris says that the supposed mismatch between Patrice Bergeron and Ryan Kesler looks silly now. Kevin Paul Dupont has the hit on Nathan Horton in game three as the turning point of the series. James Murphy has five takeaways from a classic series.

Tim Thomas bucks convention - Joe McDonald has the Bruins goaltender with a season for the ages. More on Thomas from Bob Ryan | Ron Borges | Ricky Doyle | Rich Garven | Helene Elliott

Teamwork, resilience delivered Cup - Jackie MacMullan says that the Bruins workmanlike perseverance brought them together to end the Cup drought. Some other columns from those who don’t usually write about hockey: Bill Reynolds | Vin Sylvia |Dan Shaughnessy (gulp) | Steve Buckley | Bill Burt 

A dream postseason for Brad Marchand - Dan Duggan looks at a dream postseason for the Bruins rookie. Cam Tucker has Marchand and Bergeron proving to be a potent 1-2 punch last night. Hannah Becker has coach Claude Julien relishing the moment. Douglas Flynn says that the Bruins probably still don’t full grasp what they have accomplished.

A long series ends poorly for Luongo - Amalie Benjamin has the Canucks goalie coming up small once again. Matt Kalman says that the Bruins did not take pleasure in the failures of the Canucks. Scott Burnside says that Luongo and the Canucks were decidedly average on the big stage.

As he wanted, Recchi goes out on a high note - Fluto Shinzawa’s notebook has the veteran ending his career as a Stanley Cup Champion. Steve Conroy in the Herald notebook, has Nathan Horton making a contribution pre-game.  The Bruins Journal has Bergeron notching two goals in the clincher. The Telegram notebook has more on Horton importing some Garden ice to Vancouver. The CSNNE notes have more on Recchi calling it a career.

To answer yesterday’s question about the ratings – the overnights are in, and the game did a 43.4 rating with a 64 share locally in Boston. It’s the highest rating for a hockey game on record in Boston.

Bruins/Canucks averaged a 28.1/44 for the series in Boston. Last year’s Celtics/Lakers seven game series averaged a 25.0/40. It’s even more impressive when two of the Bruins games were on Versus.

If you’re going to buy Bruins championship gear, why not buy it through here, and support BSMW? Doesn’t cost you a penny more.

Filed Under: Morning Links
  • mandb97

    Michael Felger took it on the chin last night by a couple of people for his constant complaining about the Bruins using their fourth line. First, Matt Kalman from the Bruins Blog put this tweet out, "Next time the DB radio host complains about CJ playing 4th line, take video of that shift of nonstop attack and jam it down his pie hole." The second person was Bruin forward Shawn Thornton who was being interviewed by the Comcast's Mike Giardi and Joe Haggarty. Thornton had Giardi mention that the Bruins were 12-3 when the fourth line played eight minutes or more. Thornton then gave a drive by Triple H "suck it" immediately afterwards.

    Although it took him to the end of the series, Felger was at least able to admit he was pretty much wrong on everything he thought about the Bruins. I just wish he could have seen it sooner.

    • Doc Michaels

      Jack Edwards slammed him — as did Michael Holley — during the first segment on EEI, pointing out that Felger (designated as "the other station's host who shall remain nameless") thought Marchand was never going to amount to anything back in October and also that Rask should've been the starting goaltender. Edwards said he almost got ran off the station when he told them Marchand was going to be a factor on this team.

      Frankly Felger ought to take it on the chin. He was essentially wrong about every analytical point he ever made about this team, and I agree mandb97, he wasn't ever going to own up to it unless they won it all….which they did.

    • NutCracker

      Felger also said early in the season that the Bruins should have traded Tim Thomas to Philly and give the job full-time to Tuuka. He hated that the Bruins resigned TT to a fat new contract. He absolutely hated the Bergeron signing, he railed on and on about Z Chara getting a long-term contract, he thought the Peverly/Kelley pick-up stunk ("they'll never help the Bruins) but he raved about how much he loved the Kaberle trade. He's called for Chiarelli and Julien to be fired. He also said that Marchand shouldn't even be on the team, Recchi is too old and should get his ice time cut to nothing, don't play Siedenberg with Chara on the same line and who could ever forget the 'A goalie can never steal a game for you' rant during the Montreal series. Felger hated that Thorton was even getting any ice time so I'm happy Thorton told him to stick-it up his keester. Felger is wrong way more often than right but you'd think he invented the game the way he always pats himself on the back. He's an incessant whiner.

  • APimpNamedDaveR

    Still waiting for those "nobody cares about hockey" posts….

    • Classless

      right here. I don't care about hockey. I'm only happy Boston has 4 active coaches with rings. Boston is titletown, but that doesn't change the fact that i didn't watch more than 5 minutes of the Bruins all year.

      • Angry Old Bastard

        well bully for you, "Classless" (that makes 1)…. LOL

        • tl;dr

          Nobody cares about hockey. Oh, people will care when the season starts again but then, by mid-seaon, apathy will set in and then "fans" will start caring once the playoffs start.

    • latetodinner

      Sure…let me try. Nationally the game got approximately a 5.0 rating overnight. It lost the 8:00 hour to And So You Think You Can Dance but won the 9:00 and 10:00 hours. At most 9 mill people across the country tuned in for the game. This was the best hockey tv rating in 36 years. Locally in the Boston market these numbers were disproportionately huge. However last year when the B's were not in the Stanley Cup finals the ratings in Boston were less than 1.5 share. So if you want to argue that when your home city is involved in the finals more people are interested…great. My point is the best rating in 36 years…would force MLB, NFL and NASCAR executives to jump out a window. (I did not look up the NBA because I hate them).

      Look personally I am a casual fan. I go to the occasional Providence B's game but have not been to a game in Boston in 15 years. Other than the playoffs I can't remember the last time I sat through a complete game. The regular season ratings say most fans are like me. No one is denying that the playoffs brought a bump…but before we go declaring that people care about hockey…let's see what ticket sales in December look like.

      One caveat, the NHL might be poised to be extremely lucky. Unlike the NFL who has a vested interested in quickly solving their labor issues, the NBA is looking at a prolonged fight this year. To be honest I will be quite surprised if there is basketball before January if at all. If that is the case the NHL might get a bigger stage.

      • Doc Michaels

        LOL "a bump?" That's what you call one of the most historically highest rated events EVER seen in this market?

        Anyway, I'll take that bet with you and see what ticket sales in December are like. Something tells me hockey is going to be back on the table for many years to come provided they keep putting a competitive team out there that goes on playoff runs.

        As far as your analysis of the rartings go, for the purpose of BOSTON Sports Media, looking at national numbers is a waste of time. (Should we talk about NASCAR in this market because people watch it down south? lol).

        You completely overlook the fact that historically, whenever the Bruins have been decent in the last 5 years, and have had a big game, the ratings HAVE been huge. They've gotten 17's for major games even during the regular season I believe — why you fail to remember this kind of thing is that the fan base has had little to celebrate over the last 10-15 years so those moments have been fairly isolated until now. Prior to that, even though they didn't win a Cup, they were always in the playoffs and typically got very good ratings in the '80s and a good chunk of the '90s, outdrawing the Celtics during the '90s many times (even when the C's went on isolated playoff runs).

        You use this "disproportionately huge" line to try and off-set the ratings from the other night when in fact anyone would have realized that when the Bruins are a legitimate story, they are a bigger draw than the Celtics. It's now been proven by this series, which outdrew the much-discussed Celtics-Lakers even though two of the games were on VERSUS for crying out loud!

        That doesn't mean they are going to get massive numbers for regular season games night in and out — I think as an overall sport, both the NBA and NHL are kind of like "drop in, drop out" types of events since their regular seasons go on forever. People will have interest for certain games but until the playoffs kick into gear, games aren't events like football (baseball is likewise a bigger draw most of the time though during the summer it has nothing competing against it which is why it's never a fair comparison).

        We'll see what happens but something tells me you'll be off the mark as you typically are.

        • Winning

          I don't get why people feel the need to constantly talk about hockey and how much they don't care about it.

          Things I don't care about and never talk about in my everyday life
          1) Nascar
          2) Sewing/knitting
          3) Decoupage
          4) Brocoli

          Those are things i could care less about but don't feel the need to go out of my way, find people who enjoy those things, and tell them how much I dislike or don't care.

        • regular man

          "they are a bigger draw than the Celtics. It's now been proven by this series, which outdrew the much-discussed Celtics-Lakers even though two of the games were on VERSUS for crying out loud! "

          Yes the Bruins had higher ratings in the finals. But the Celtics had higher 2011 regular season ratings and had higher ratings in some other playoff games in recent years when both teams were competitive. I think the Bruins and Celtics are fairly equal in terms of popularity with both teams behind the Pats and Red Sox.

  • HighWireNickEsasky

    Where are all the posters who say no one cares about hockey?

    • Angry Old Bastard

      "Classless" doesn't (AND HE WANTS YOU TO KNOW ABOUT IT!)………ha-ha

      • tl;dr

        I don't care about hockey.

  • mandb97

    What was amazing about last night's performance by the Bruins was the thorough domination of the Canucks in game seven. It made me think of other times a Boston team went into enemy territory and won a game seven in a final or in the case of the Patriots a conference title as convincingly as the Bruins did. Here are my choices. Remember it has to be game seven of a final so the Red Sox over the Yankees in the 2004 ALCS does not count. It has to be the World Series only. The Super Bowl does not count as well because it is at a neutral site. The AFC title is as far as you can go for the Patriots

    Celtics – 1974 at Milwaukee, Boston 102 Milwaukee 87. Even though the road team won four of the first six games, not many people gave the Celtics too much of chance in game seven. The Celtics lost game six in a heart breaking 102-101 double overtime loss when Kareem Abdul-Jabbar hit a sky hook with two seconds left. The Celtics though were undaunted in game seven and led from the opening tip. Dave Cowens had 28 and 14 for the Celtics.

    Red Sox – 2004 at St. Louis, Boston 3 St. Louis 0. Derek Lowe was spectacular as he only gave up three hits in seven innings. Trot Nixon had a bases clearing double in the third that sealed the deal. It was a three run game that seemed more like a six run game because the middle of the Cardinals line-up was awful.

    Patriots – 2005 at Pittsburgh, New England 41 Pittsburgh 27. The game was not nearly as close as the score would indicate. The game was over by the half when Rodney Harrison took a Ben Roethlisberger interception 87 yards for a score. Earlier, the Pats showed they were in a class all of their own after Jerome Bettis fumbled on the Patriots 39. The first play by the Patriots was a sixty yard touchdown pass from Tom Brady to Deion Branch. the rout was on.

    • APS

      I think the Bs game was in the neighborhood of the Pats AFC championship in 05, albeit in front of only a quarter or maybe fifth of the crowd size. I can't remember the 74 Cs in any meaningful way. The 04 World Series of course was a sweep so there was no all-or-nothing game.

      • mandb97

        My mistake, you are right on the Red Sox. It was of course a sweep. I guess I did not have enough coffee to start the day. The Red Sox have never won a game seven on the road in the World Series, even in the early years. I did find it funny that in 1912 game 2 was a 6-6 tie in eleven innings. I wonder if Bud Selig was commissioner back then.There were also only two home runs in the series both in game seven. There must have been hurricane force winds during that game.

    • Tony

      I remember all of those well, but I think the "old timers" would tell you that nothing could ever top the Celtics beating Wilt, West and Baylor in Game 7 at the Forum in 1969–the "Balloons" game. For me, it would be hard to top the feeling I had when the Pats finally won in Miami's Orange Bowl, after 18 straight losses, in the 1985 AFC title game. Of course, that win was followed up by the humiliation against the Bears in the Super Bowl. The 2005 AFC title game at Pittsburgh is also one of my all-time favorite memories from the Pats great run earlier in the 2000s. Underdogs, frigid weather, Brady with a 103 degree fever the night before, facing the #1 defense in the NFL and a team that had wiped them out on Halloween to end their 21-game winning streak. That beatdown was epic and payback was indeed sweet.

      • apizzi

        I was 18 in 1969 and I will never forget Red's "what are they going to do with those damn balloons" statement. Also, Tony is right in that you have to consider the opponent and it being the Lakers made it even sweeter.

        I think the Bruins performance puts to rest that while winning a 4 of 7 is difficult, it does prove that the better "team" does win. As last night's game showed, the continued physical nature of the Bruins eventually wore the Canuck's defense down.

      • mandb97

        Tony, the only reason I left out the 69 Celtics is they had to hold on for dear life in game seven. Who knows what would have happened if Don Nelson's shot does not take a miraculous bounce. I was looking at games where the Boston team controlled all facets of the game. You are right about the 85 Patriots. They dominated the Dolphins from the opening kickoff.

        • Tony

          Ah, I understand. Good points. The C's were up big in that "balloons" game and then the Lakers–with Wilt on the bench–came roaring back. Hanging on for dear life is an apt description.

  • mandb97

    Kevin Walsh of CSNNE did a terrific job with locker room interviews last night. Even though he was getting doused by beer and champagne, Walsh was able to keep his cool and ask very thoughtful questions to Tim Thomas and Mark Recchi. He got Recchi to say that he was seriously considering retirement last year but Peter Chiarelli was able to talk him out of it. His best moment was his interview of Claude Julien and Zdeno Chara. Walsh asked Julien about getting the best out of younger players without having them lose confidence. He then was able to keep Zdeno Chara around after he dumped beer from the cup onto Julien's head. Chara said the C on his jersey represented everybody. Walsh was the star for CSNNE.

    • Lance_

      I remember listening to "sports talk radio" in the early part of the playoffs and Julien was hammered by everyone about what a bad coach he is/was. I've always liked Julien (I saw him play his rookie season for the Salt Lake Golden Eagles). The b.s. about him was unfair but it usually is. I'm happy for him and hope he'll get the same break Doc Rivers gets.

      Great fun game last night – the good guys won. This victory is good for the area and good for hockey.

      • mandb97

        There is no question that Julien throughout his tenure has carried himself with a lot of dignity. Even if you think he has flaws as a coach and I do not know why anyone would think it now, he has always been respectful to the media even when they did not deserve it.

  • Paul

    Why does Shaughnessy always get the front page column after a Boston team wins a championship? His column has run on the Globe front page after every one of this current run of wins. Why doesn’t Bob Ryan get a shot at that spot? He is twice the writer that Shank is. You would at least have thought that he would get the ’08 Celtics front page since he is more of a hoops guy. This really bugs me.

    • apizzi

      Seriously, my only advice is to ignore the guy. I haven't read a word from him in years and you would be amazed how terrific it is. However, you are right in that Ryan and I would even say KPD should have had the front page column.

  • brian

    Joe Amorsino was bad on Ch. 7 last night, getting a little too caught up in the moment at one point when someone in the Bruins entourage had their turn hoisting the Cup and happened to be standing right next to him, so he put his hands on the Cup and helped hoist as well. Later while interviewing Patrice Bergeron, he started talking about how he missed a good chunk of the post-season last year but scored a memorable OT goal against the Flyers, apparently confusing Bergeron for Marc Savard.

    • APimpNamedDaveR

      Are you kiddin' me?

      • mandb97

        If you were playing a drinking game and you had to do a shot for every time Amorsino said, "Are you kidding me?" you are probably still drunk as to this posting.

  • APimpNamedDaveR

    I am beside myself with joy! I have waited years for this! YEARS AND YEARS!!!!! I really never thought I'd see the day come, but it's finally here…..

    A mill flooring sell-off at Lumber Liquidators!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    I'll be there at 11:00 sharp tomorrow morning, that's for sure!!!!!!!!

    Hey, did anything happen in sports last night?

  • Doc Michaels

    It's actually 4 Boston college hockey titles in the last 10 years (3 for BC, 1 for BU too)

    • http://www.bostonsportsmedia.com Bruce Allen

      That first Boston College one was actually in 2001, before the Patriots first Super Bowl, (which was the arbitrary starting point that I had set) that was the only reason I didn't include it.

      • Tony

        And Bruce, if you remember, anyone in Boston who was not a BU alumnus celebrated that BC title in '01 as if it were a pro title. We were starved for a champion and the ink still hadn't dried on Callahan's "Loserville" column, if I recall correctly. I remember watching that entire title game against North Dakota and going nuts when Kobasew scored that great OT goal to win it—never mind the fact that I think I may have set foot on the BC campus once in my entire lifetime. That's how starved the city was to win a title in ANY sport, pro or college, back then. My, how things have changed.

        • Jon

          I don't know if I would say that – I mean BC's championship game against UND was awesome and I was very happy for Jerry York as he's the classiest coach I know of – but I don't remember anyone from other schools in Hockey East being that enthused with the title. Remember, BC has huge rivalries with BU, UNH and Maine and lesser rivalries with Harvard, UMASS, UML, PC, Merrimack, and NU. We're at each others throats for 5 months out of the year.

        • Hoss

          That's not even a little bit true.

        • Tony

          OK, then I'll clarify what I said above.

          I celebrated that BC title as if it were a pro title, because: A–the City of Boston hadn't won anything in a long, long time; and B–I have no rooting interest in the college hockey wars around town. If BU is in the Frozen Four, I root for them. If NU wins the Beanpot, I'm happy for them. Heck, when Harvard won it all in '89, I was happy for them, too. I went to school in upstate NY, so even though I grew up around here, there's no animosity that I hold for any of the four big college hockey programs around here. I was just glad, back in 2001, to see a team–any team–with the name "Boston" in it win a championship.

        • Jon

          I understand. Again, I was happy to see the Eagles win over a WCHA team, especially.

        • cakes_are_cooking

          Speaking as a BU guy, that was Krys Kolanos who scored the game winner vs. NoDak in 2001.

      • Doc Michaels

        Fair enough Bruce, I thought you were going by the last 10 years, not the Patriots SB win starting point. The conversation most places has been "the last 10 years of Boston sports" of which that BC win does count basically.

  • Bill

    Is it just me, or is the 98.5 patting their own backs about how "they made hockey relevant again" act getting old. Like the station. Love that WEEI has competition, but get over yourselves. Hockey is back because the B's are winning.

    • NutCracker

      I agree with you Bill. I too like 98.5 but enough already about how they are the ONLY media outlet to cover the Bruins, blah, blah. I guess it's marketing but it gets obnoxious after awhile. How many times is Felger going to remind us how great he is and how lucky we are that he covers the Bruin's while others only cover the Sox, Patriots and Celtics and Gresh and Zolack are 'pumping their own tires' too. If you're good, people know it; you don't have to tell them.

    • Winning

      The B's were winning the past few years albeit while crumbling in the playoffs and other than a few peeps from Dale on WEEI, no1 would know. 98.5 should take SOME credit for providing a forum for discussion, while WEEI openly mocked "hockey talk."

      These playoffs started like any other year, 0-2 to Montreal, yet 98.5 was covering it long before that. I don't think WEEI started any "serious" coverage until game 5-6 against Tampa, and after those Saturday douchebags harrassed Jack Edwards to the point that Glen had him on his show to make peace.

%d bloggers like this: