Down Memory Lane with Hockey's "Original Six" - Brief Article - Editorial

USA Today (Society for the Advancement of Education), May, 2001 by Wayne M. Barrett

TO STOP ROOTING for your favorite team may be the ultimate act of sacrilege for those who worship on the altar of athletics. A New York Ranger fan since grade school, I suddenly turned on the Blueshirts--for no plausible reason--during the Wales Conference finals of 1986. I unexpectedly found myself, in my heart of hearts, hoping the Montreal Canadiens would knock off the Rangers, and I got my wish: The Habs went on to win the series and the Stanley Cup, but, just like that, I suddenly was left with no favorite team in my favorite sport.

These and so many other memories came flooding back while reading John Halligan's superb new book, New York Rangers: 75 Years, one of three 75th anniversary celebrations (the Boston Bruins and Chicago Blackhawks are the others) put out by Tehabi Books, San Diego, Calif. Ironically, these three teams, along with the Canadiens, Toronto Maple Leafs, and Detroit Red Wings, are known as the "Original Six" even though only two of them--the Leafs and Canadiens--were around when the National Hockey League formed in 1917. Actually, the "originals" were the lone six NHL franchises from 1942-1967, before the league doubled in size. Today, there are 30 teams in the NHL.

Memory can be a funny thing, too. Four of the six teams made the playoffs during those years, and, in my mind's eye, each season's standings were pretty much the same when I first became a fan in the 1960s: Montreal and Toronto finished first or second; Chicago and Detroit were either third or fourth, with the Rangers and Bruins flip-flopping in the bottom two spots. In those days, the NHL inexplicably had a playoff system in which first played third and second played fourth, providing disincentives in the top and bottom halves of the standings. Why finish first when second place will earn you an easier opening-round opponent? And why fight to move up from fourth to third when the reward is having to meet the best team in the league?

Like most kids, I had one of those table-top hockey games in which metal players are "skated" around the "ice" surface via movable rods and knobs. I had all six teams, and played with my father constantly so there'd be enough games to tabulate our own standings and set up playoff matchups. He, of course, took his favorite club, the Blackhawks (and Maple Leafs and Red Wings) while I naturally had command of the Rangers (and Canadiens and Bruins).

I, like my dad, was (and still am) obsessed with uniform design and colors, and we made our team selections based in large part on this factor. We broke the Original Six into three uniform groups. (During this era--pre-1971--a team wore its "color" jersey at home and "white" jersey on the road. The pants always remained the same, as is true today.) Comprising the first group were the Canadiens and Rangers, both of whom wore red, white, and blue, but in opposite patterns. Montreal had red jerseys and blue pants; New York, blue jerseys and red pants. (Then, as now, the Rangers were the lone NHL franchise that did not display a team logo as part of its jersey design.)

The Blackhawks and Bruins made up the second group because they were the only teams with black in their uniforms. (How times have changed.) Chicago's red jersey with the Indian head logo remains the best uniform in all of sports. I was a high school freshman in 1972 the first time I saw the Blackhawks in person, at Madison Square Garden, and stood completely mesmerized during warmups by the absolute beauty of these fashion gods from the Midwest. Every year since, no matter what, I go see the Blackhawks at least once on their road trips to the New York area--that's the advantage of having three NHL franchises within a 50-mile radius of your home--and still can't help but marvel at the magnificent sight of those splendid garments. And, although I despised the Bruins, I took them because, like the Rangers, there was a unique aspect to their uniforms: Boston didn't have white jerseys. It was black at home and yellow on the road.

The third grouping were the one-color (that is, if you don't count white) clubs: Detroit (red) and Toronto (blue). Dad loved these uniforms for their simplicity; I hated them for the same reason. Age, however, has matured my tastes. Today, Red Wing homes and Maple Leaf roads are among my favorites.

I own dozens of hockey jerseys, both authentic and replicas. I've even designed and made at least a dozen shirts myself. (When teams went to "third" jerseys for marketing purposes, the Rangers were the lone club with a "fourth" jersey. In actuality, though, there is a "fifth" Ranger jersey. It came off my sewing machine and hangs in my closet.) Still, there's nothing like your first love (er, jersey). Throughout high school, up until senior year, every day after classes we played street hockey. A few guys got Ranger home jerseys. I was desperate to do the same. After finally convincing my parents to let me have the shirt, only road blues were available. I bought it anyway, with number 15 (defenseman Jim Neilson, "The Big Chief," my favorite player). I added an "A" for assistant captain on the front and, much to the amusement of my friends, wrote Neilson asking for the shoelace that adorned his jersey's neckline. Alas, he never responded.