If you are prepping for a trivia night or if
you just have this deep curiosity about the origins
of the cultural institutions we kind of take
for granted, you're in the exact right place.
Welcome to today's custom -tailored deep dive.
Yeah, really glad to be here for this one. Because
we are looking at a massive stack of sources
today. We're detailing the history, the evolution,
and the, frankly, insane records of the NHL's
ultimate prize. Right, the Stanley Cup final.
Exactly. And our mission for this deep dive is
to uncover that surprising history. We want to
show you how North America's oldest professional
sports trophy transformed from this very simple
amateur challenge cup into the heavily scheduled
broadcast spectacle you see today. And it really
is a pleasure to analyze this one because we
aren't just looking at a static list of, you
know, which team won in which year. Right. We
are going to examine exactly how this championship
was shaped over the decades. I mean, it's a story
influenced by constantly changing roles. Global
pandemic. Yeah. Global pandemics, complex legal
battles. The trophy we see hoisted today. is
the product of a deeply chaotic, totally unpredictable
history. It really is. So let's go all the way
back to the origins. I want to introduce you
to Lord Stanley of Preston. Back in 1892, he
was the Governor General of Canada, and he decided
to donate a trophy. Originally, it had a rather
clunky name. Very clunky. The Dominion Hockey
Challenge Cup. Yeah. And it was strictly meant
for Canada's top -ranking amateur ice hockey
club. The Montreal Hockey Club actually won the
very first one in 1893. What's fascinating here
is that specific word, challenge. Right. It was
not a standard playoff tournament trophy like
the ones we're accustomed to today. Not at all.
The champions held on to the cup until one of
two specific scenarios played out. Either they
lost their own league title to another club in
the regular season, or a champion from a completely
different league issued a formal challenge, played
them in a final match, and defeated them to claim
the silver. You can think of it almost like a
championship belt in boxing. Exactly like boxing.
You held it until someone officially challenged
you for it and physically took it away on the
ice. And for those early years, this was strictly
a prize for amateurs. Professional teams were
entirely locked out. Completely ineligible. Yeah,
they didn't even become eligible to challenge
for the Stanley Cup until 1906. But here's where
it gets really interesting. Oh, the 1914 series.
Yes. By 1914, the trustees who managed the Cup
decided that these interleague challenges should
only happen after the regular season ended, which
leads to what is essentially the first World
Series of hockey. Right. We get a prearranged
series between the champion of the National Hockey
Association, the NHA. Which was the Toronto Hockey
Club. And the champion of the Pacific Coast Hockey
Association, the PCHA, the Victoria Aristocrats.
Exactly. Now, you would naturally assume that
organizing the first major East meets West championship
series would be a highly professional operation.
You would assume that, yes. But it was entirely
bogged down by bureaucratic misunderstanding.
It's hilarious. The Victoria Club traveled all
the way east, but they hadn't actually filed
a formal application to the Stanley Cup trustees
to challenge for the cup. How does a professional
team travel across the continent for a championship
and just, you know, forget to submit the paperwork?
I mean, it was a total comedy of assumptions.
The PCHA president, Lester Patrick, thought he
didn't need to file a formal challenge with the
trustees. Right. He assumed Emmett Quinn, the
commissioner of the NHA, was handling all the
paperwork and making the necessary arrangements.
And meanwhile, the Stanley Cup trustees were
sitting in their offices feeling completely ignored.
Yeah, ignored by these upstart professional leagues
who were seemingly arranging matches without
any permission. So it's March 17, 1914, right
before this. highly anticipated event. And a
letter arrives from the trustees stating they
are not letting the Stanley Cup travel West under
any circumstances. They were completely serious,
too. They refused to consider Victoria a proper
challenger because the team never formally verified
themselves. They were entirely prepared to pull
the plug on the whole series. They were. But
the very next day, a trustee named William Foran
had to step in and publicly state it was all
just a profound misunderstanding. Damage control.
Exactly. The tension eventually diffused, largely
because Toronto simply went out onto the ice
and swept Victoria in a best -of -five series
in just three games. So the Cup stayed put anyway.
Right, which made the trustees threat. somewhat
moot. So what does this all mean for the broader
history of the Cup? Because to you or me, it
seems like a minor administrative hiccup, but
the sources actually frame it as a turning point.
The takeaway here is monumental for the sport.
That specific 1914 drama effectively ended the
strict, overbearing influence of the Stanley
Cup trustees. Yeah. After that administrative
mess, William Foran wrote to the NHA president
to officially state that the trustees were now
perfectly satisfied to let the professional leagues
make all the arrangements for the matches themselves.
Just giving up the control. They recognized that
they needed the top professional leagues to keep
the trophy prominent in the public eye, especially
since another trophy, the Allen Cup, had established
itself as the premier prize for amateur hockey.
It was the exact moment the pro leagues took
the wheel. Which totally opens the door for the
trophy to expand its footprint. In 1914, an American
-based team called the Portland Rosebuds joined
the PCHA. First American team. Yeah. And the
trustees made this unprecedented statement. They
said the cup was no longer exclusively for the
best team in Canada. It was now for the best
team in the world. A huge shift. And by 1917,
the Seattle Metropolitans actually became the
first American team to win it. But just as the
tournament was expanding its borders, we hit
1919. The Montreal Canadiens and the Seattle
Metropolitans were battling in the finals. The
series was tied at two wins apiece with one tie
game. And then... The Spanish influenza epidemic
forced the total cancellation of the series.
It is such a sobering historical moment. It was
the very first time the Stanley Cup was not awarded.
You have two incredible teams pushing each other
to the absolute limit, completely halted by a
severe health crisis. When the sport finally
caught its breath and resumed, the landscape
of the leagues themselves began to shift dramatically.
We start to see a significant consolidation of
power. How many leagues were operating at this
point, realistically? By 1922, there were actually
three different professional leagues actively
competing for the Cup. Three? Yeah. You had the
NHL, the PCHA, and the newly created Western
Canada Hockey League, or WCHL. Because there
were three champions, the organizers had to invent
this awkward semi -final buy system. A three
-league tournament sounds incredibly difficult
to balance. How did they determine who played
who? Two of the league champions would play each
other in a semifinal series, and the third champion
simply received a free pass straight to the final.
That's wild. It was an awkward structure, and
it really didn't last long. In 1924, two of the
leagues merged. Then, by 1925, the Victoria Cougars
won the Cup. And that name is vital for you to
remember. Why is that? Because the 1925 Victoria
Cougars hold the distinction of being the absolute
last non -NHL team to ever win the Stanley Cup.
Ever. Ever. By 1926, the WCHL folded entirely.
Most of the premier players moved to the NHL,
leaving the NHL as the sole league competing
for the trophy. So the NHL essentially inherited
the trophy by just being the last league standing.
Pretty much. But they didn't actually own it,
right? Yeah. From what we've discussed, it was
still legally a challenge cup managed by trustees.
If we connect this to the bigger picture, this
is where the off -ice legal maneuvering becomes
just as important as the on -ice play. In 1947,
the NHL officially reached an agreement with
the remaining cup trustees at the time, P .D.
Ross and Cooper Smeaton. This agreement explicitly
granted control of the cup to the NHL. It allowed
the league to outright reject challenges from
any independent or outside leagues that might
want to play for it. Wow. They legally built
a moat around the trophy to ensure it stayed
within their ecosystem. But wait, if Lord Stanley
originally donated this trophy to the country
as an open challenge cup. How did the NHL legally
justify just taking exclusive ownership of it?
That exact question remained a quiet debate for
decades until it finally erupted in the courts.
In 2006, there was a major case brought before
the Ontario Superior Court, and the court found
that the 1947 agreement actually went against
Lord Stanley's original conditions. A modern
court ruled that the NHL was violating the stipulations
set back in 1892. Precisely. The context is crucial
here, though. This lawsuit was happening in the
wake of the 2004 to 2005 NHL lockout. Right,
where the league canceled its entire season.
Exactly. And the cup was not awarded. Because
of this 2006 ruling, the NHL had to formally
agree that if the league is ever not operating
for a season, they must allow non -NHL teams
to challenge for and play for the cup. That is
fascinating. So legally, the trophy still retains
that original 19th century DNA of an open challenge
cup, even if the NHL manages it exclusively during
normal operations. OK, let's unpack this. I want
to look at the actual gameplay during these formative
decades because early championship hockey was
structurally bizarre. Bizarre is the right word.
Since the final was an interleague championship
in the early days, the differing leagues brought
completely different rule books to the ice. The
PCHA played with seven men on the ice, utilizing
a position called the rover. Right, the rover.
While the NHA, and later the NHL, played the
standard six -man game. So during the Stanley
Cup final, they would alternate the rule set
every single game. Game one would be six players.
Game two would be seven players. It forces you
to imagine the sheer tactical chaos for the coaches
and players. Seriously. You're competing for
the ultimate prize, and every other night, the
fundamental geometry of the ice changes. You
have an extra skater out there disrupting passing
lanes and defensive structure. It's like playing
two different sports. Exactly. Teams had to build
rosters capable of playing two distinctly different
games within a single week. Furthermore, ties
were permitted in the finals all the way until
1928, which could completely alter the momentum
of a series without resolving a winner. And once
the NHL took sole control, you'd think things
would standardize smoothly. But the playoff brackets
themselves were constantly shape -shifting. The
formats were highly experimental. From 1929 to
1938, the NHL utilized a playoff structure that
seems entirely counterintuitive today. How so?
The two teams that finished in first place in
their respective divisions were forced to play
each other immediately in the semifinals. That
makes no sense. The two absolute best teams in
the league had to eliminate each other before
the championship round. Yes. The victor of that
heavyweight clash earned an automatic berth to
the final. Meanwhile, the second and third place
teams battled it out in their own separate longer
bracket to see who would eventually face that
first place survivor. That sounds grueling. At
the time, the logic was to ensure a true clash
of titans, but practically it was deeply unbalanced.
Eventually, the league transitioned into what
fans call the original six era. Just to clarify
for anyone unfamiliar, the original six era refers
to that long period of stability, right? Correct.
From 1942 down to 1967, the league operated with
just six classic franchises. During this era,
the playoff format finally smoothed out into
a more traditional bracket. Then, from 1982 through
2020, we settled into the standard most fans
recognize today, the champion of the Eastern
Conference facing the champion of the Western
Conference. Right, until 2021. Yeah, as we saw
in 2021, the COVID -19 pandemic forced the league
to temporarily realign geographically just to
limit travel, which proves the tournament format
remains adaptable to global events, much like
it was in 1919. As the on -ice product was stabilizing,
the way fans actually consumed the game was undergoing
a revolution. The leap to television broadcasting
is a vital chapter in the Cup's history. And
looking at the sources, the Canadian and American
broadcasting journeys are wildly different. In
Canada, they started broadcasting the final in
1953, and they treated it like a national institution
from day one. A huge cultural event. Yeah. The
CBC aired the English broadcast with legends
like Danny Gallivan doing play -by -play and
Keith Dancy providing color commentary. Gallivan
was the voice of the finals for decades, calling
games all the way until 1978. And on the French
language side, you had René Le Cablier anchoring
the broadcast on SRC. The Canadian approach was
unified and reverent. The American television
market, however, treated the Stanley Cup final
as an afterthought for decades. It was incredibly
fragmented. I mean, the very first U .S. broadcast
didn't happen until 1962, and it was restricted
to a local Chicago station, WGN. Just local.
Network coverage didn't arrive until 1966 on
NBC. And even then, networks like NBC and CBS
would only broadcast selected games. They wouldn't
even commit to showing the entire championship
series. Which severely limited the sport's ability
to build national stars or a cohesive narrative
in the United States. Throughout the 1970s and
80s, the broadcast rights bounced around constantly.
Just looking for a home. Yeah, it was placed
in syndication. It was aired on something called
the Hughes Network and eventually moved to early
cable providers like the USA Network and Sports
Channel America. ESPN held the rights for a period,
but because there was no exclusive national coverage
agreement, local broadcasters could still enforce.
regional blackouts. It actually took until 1995
for the United States to secure an exclusive
national network split between Fox and ESPN.
That finally stabilized the viewing experience
for American fans, leading to the highly produced
broadcast rotations we see today with ABC and
TNT. Quite the journey. It's a stark contrast.
It took the U .S. over 40 years to treat the
Stanley Cup final with the same unified broadcasting
respect that Canadian television established
back in 1953. And that lack of early national
exposure in the U .S. makes the historical statistics
of the era even more fascinating. Because while
the broadcasts were fragmented, the dynasties
being built on the ice were legendary. Which
brings us perfectly to the records and the legends.
When we look at the sources, the extremes of
the Stanley Cup final are staggering. I'd love
for you to break down some of these team records,
starting with the sheer dominance of Montreal.
When it comes to the Stanley Cup, the Montreal
Canadiens are the undisputed benchmark. They
possess 24 total championship wins. 24. They've
made 35 appearances in the final. Between 1956
and 1960, they won the Cup five consecutive times.
And perhaps most impressively, they appeared
in the final for 10 consecutive years, from 1951
to 1960. That is insane. Their ability to monopolize
regional talent and maintain a relentless standard
of excellence during those mid -century eras
is just unmatched in the sports history. But
professional sports demand a loser for every
winner. What about the teams on the other end
of the spectrum? Well, examining the losses provides
crucial perspective on how brutally difficult
this tournament is. The Boston Bruins hold the
record for the most losses in the final, coming
up short 14 times. Ouch. Conversely, you have
a franchise like the Colorado Avalanche who possess
flawless efficiency. They have zero losses in
the finals. Every single time they navigate the
playoffs and reach the final, they win the championship.
The heartbreak extends beyond just losing the
final series, though. The sources detail some
agonizing droughts where teams simply cannot
get back to the pinnacle. The New York Rangers
endured a 54 year gap between their championship
wins in 1940 and 1994. Yeah. And then we have
the Toronto Maple Leafs. The Maple Leafs represent
a unique kind of historical burden. They are
currently enduring a 58 year drought just to
appear in a final. Just to appear. Not to win
it, but merely to secure a spot in the championship
series. Their last appearance was in 1967. We
are talking about multiple generations of fans
who have lived their entire lives without seeing
their franchise compete for the ultimate prize.
It really underscores the immense parity and
difficulty of the modern NHL structure. Amidst
all of those team struggles and long -term droughts,
the individual performances recorded in these
finals are phenomenal. The pressure is at its
absolute highest and certain players just...
elevate their game. Jean Boliveau is a perfect
example. He recorded 62 career points in the
finals alone and scored nine career game -winning
goals in those championship series. Incredible.
That demonstrates a fundamental ability to execute
when the stakes are at their absolute peak. Maurice
Richard is right there with him, recording 34
career goals in the finals while appearing in
the championship series across 12 different years.
And of course, Wayne Gretzky's numbers are almost
incomprehensible. Gritsky's 1988 performance
defies logic. In that single final series he
accumulated 13 points and 10 assists. In one
series. He was operating on a different tactical
plane than everyone else on the ice, just dissecting
defensive structures with ease. We also have
to highlight the goaltenders. Clint Benedict,
Frank McCool, and Martin Brodeur all share the
record for the most shutouts in a single final
series, which is three. Three shutouts in one
series. Blanking an opponent in the Stanley Cup
final three separate times within a best -of
-seven series is a masterclass in focus. But
my favorite record from the source material,
the most unexpected one, goes all the way back
to the era of... In 1917, a player named Bernie
Morris scored 14 goals in a single series. It
is a remarkable statistic. And it effectively
brings our entire analysis full circle because
a scoring record from 1917, established during
the volatile era of interleague challenge play,
still stands securely in the record books right
alongside the modern achievements of superstars
like Gretzky and Brodeur. It's wild. Summarizing
everything we have explored today, the evolution
of the Stanley Cup final is a testament to endurance.
It began as a loosely organized amateur Canadian
challenge cup. It survived administrative chaos,
shifting leagues, legal alignments, the Spanish
flu, alternating roster sizes, and significant
legal challenges. Just to become a highly structured,
internationally broadcast corporate juggernaut.
Exactly. Yet legally and historically, it continues
to carry the exact DNA of Lord Stanley's original
gift from 1892. So the next time you watch the
cup being hoisted. With the crowd roaring and
the broadcast beaming out globally remember the
depth of what you are actually looking at. It
is a piece of silver that survived the collapse
of rival leagues, complex court disputes, and
the utter chaos of early professional hockey.
This raises an important question though. A concept
to leave you pondering. If we reconsider that
2006 Ontario court ruling the decision stating
that non -NHL teams maintain the legal right
to challenge for the Cup during a lost season.
Hypothetically, if the NHL were to completely
shut down its operations tomorrow for any unforeseen
reason, what amateur or independent hockey club
out there today would actually possess the audacity,
the organization, and the skill to step up, issue
a formal challenge, and attempt to take Lord
Stanley's Cup all the way back to its 90s? 19th
century roots. That would certainly be the ultimate
modern challenge. Thank you for joining us on
this deep dive into the archives. Keep seeking
out the rich complex histories behind the spectacles
we watched today and we will catch you next time.